FRENCH  CIVILIZATION 

IN  THE  NINETEENTH 

CENTURY 

A  HISTORICAL  INTRODUCTION 


BY 


ALBERT  LEON  GUERARD 

AGREGE  DE  I/UNIVERSITE 
AUTHOR  OF  "FRENCH  PROPHETS  OF  YESTERDAY" 


NEW  YORK 

THE  CENTURY  CO. 

1918 


(All  rights  reterved.) 


TO 

CHANCELLOR  DAVID  STARR  JORDAN 


2029643 


NOTE 

THE  present  work  is  the  outcome  of  a  course  of  lectures  delivered 
at  Stanford  University,  California,  during  the  second  semester 
of  the  academic  year  1912-13.  The  original  purpose  of  this 
study,  and  its  main  object,  was  to  supplement  the  usual 
University  courses  in  French  literature.  But  I  trust  it  may 
be  found  of  some  use  for  the  general  reader  who  wishes  to 
follow  with  intelligent  interest  the  tangled  problems  of  modern 
French  life.  I  need  hardly  say  that  within  the  short  compass 
at  my  disposal  I  could  barely  give  the  outlines  of  my  immense 
subject.  I  tried  to  eschew  unnecessary  details,  but,  in  order  to 
avoid  vagueness,  and  to  make  the  book  a  practical  instrument  of 
study,  each  section  is  preceded  by  its  synopsis,  chronological 
and  genealogical  tables  are  added  to  all  the  historical  parts,  and 
working  bibliographies  are  appended.  The  aim  of  these,  as  of 
the  whole  book,  is  not  to  be  exhaustive,  but  to  point  out  the 
next  step  —  the  most  available  and  clearest  account  of  the 
subject,  and  especially  the  bibliographic  instruments  for  further 
investigation.  For  practical  purposes,  only  French  and  English 
authorities  have  been  directly  quoted.  The  plan  adopted  in- 
volves repetitions:  but  this  artistic  defect  was  found  to  be 
atoned  for  by  pedagogical  advantages. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  I 
THE  FOUNDATIONS 

PAGE 

THE  COUNTRY — THE  RACE — THE  TRADITION         .  .17 

§  1.  THE  COUNTRY. — The  theory  of  environment — France  :  situa- 
tion— Size — Historical  connection  with  the  Mediterranean  world 
— Geographical  affinities  with  Northern  Europe — Mountainous 
regions  and  basins — Extreme  variety  of  aspects  and  climates: 
the  main  regions — Natural  unity :  the  role  of  the  depression  of 
Poitou — But  unity  chiefly  a  historical  achievement — Resources: 
fertility  overrated ;  harbours,  rivers,  and  mineral  wealth  medi- 
ocre— But  many-sided,  well-balanced — The  human  factor  pre- 
dominant. 

§  2.  THE  RACK. —  (a)  Language. — Romanic  or  Neo-Latin — Flem- 
ish, Breton,  Basque — North  and  South,  langue  d'oil  and  langue 
d'oc;  supremacy  of  Northern  French  undisputed — French 
beyond  the  limits  of  France — Restricted  significance  of  language 
affinity. 

(b)   Historical     Ethnography. — Celtiberians,     Gauls,     Romans, 
Franks — Minor  elements:  Greeks  and  Arabs — Constant  infiltra- 
tion— Polish    and    Italian    refugees — The   Celtic   problem    as    an 
example  of  ethnographic  confusion. 

5  3.  THE  RACE  (continued). —  (c)  Anthropology. — Criteria — Lim- 
itations— The  Nordic,  Celto-Slavic,  and  Mediterranean  races  in 
France — The  French  a  racial  medley — Their  unity  an  act  of 
will. 

(d)  Psychology  of  the  French  people. — Collective  psychology 
may   be   a   delusion — But  has   formative   influence — (1)    Cheer- 
fulness—  (2)     Nervous    temperament — True    of    Paris    and    the 
South,    not    of    France    as    a    whole — (3)    Sociability — (4)     In- 
tellectualism — These  traits  the  result  of  France's  natural  heter- 
ogeneity and  self-conquered  unity — They  veil,  but  do  not  destroy, 
the  common  human  substratum. 

(e)  Note:  Race  from  the  Eugenic  Point  of  View — Racial  de- 
cay?—»The   alleged  lowering  of  the   stature — The  falling  birth- 
rate. 

S  4.  THE  TRADITION:  ANCIENT  REGIME  AND  REVOLUTION. — Dra- 
matic character  of  French  history — Real  continuity. 

France    grew    with    the    Capetian    dynasty — Character   of    its 
9 


10  CONTENTS 

PAOK 

power :  autocratic  but  national — Eighteenth  century :  the  King 
captured  by  the  nobles — Progress  of  radical  ideas,  failure  of  re- 
forms, sharp  reaction  at  the  close  of  the  regime. 

The  Revolution — (a)  Completes  the  work  of  the  Capetians — 
(b)  Transfers  sovereignty  from  the  King,  theoretically  to  the 
people,  practically  to  the  Third  Estate  (bourgeoisie) — (c)  Trans- 
fers vast  amount  of  landed  property  from  clergy  and  nobility 
to  bourgeoisie  and  peasantry — (d)  Temporizes  and  comprom- 
ises more  than  is  usually  thought. 

Did  France  need  a  "saviour"  in  1799? — Conditions  not  des- 
perate— Bourgeoisie  wanted  to  make  its  conquests  secure  — 
"  Close  the  era  of  revolutions  " — The  army  as  final  arbiter. 

CHAPTER  II 

NAPOLEON  .  .  .  .  .  .  .55 

Growth  of  Napoleon's  power — Three  main  elements:  glory, 
efficiency,  tyranny. 

9  1.  MILITARY  GLORY. — "  I/Epopee  " — Napoleon  as  stage  manager 
— The  army:  Its  variety  of  gorgeous  uniforms — Pageants — 
Monuments  of  triumph :  columns,  arches,  temples — Pretorian- 
ism:  Napoleon-worship  in  the  army — Its  limits — The  seamy  side 
of  militarism:  looting  on  the  heroic  scale — Reluctant  heroes — 
Growing  indifference  of  the  country. 

The  burden — Financially  light — Conscription  drains  the  blood 
of  the  nation. 

{  2.  THE  REORGANIZATION  OF  FRANCE. — Administrative  Reorgani- 
zation.— Efficient  but  hasty — Was  over-centralization  inevi- 
table?— The  Concordat  and  the  University:  their  failure — The 
Civil  Code :  its  merits,  influence,  and  limitations — The  Prefec- 
toral  administration — "  A  free  career  open  to  all  talents " — 
Privilege  soon  creeping  back. 

Political  Reconstruction. — Democracy  conjured  away — Na- 
poleon the  arbiter  of  all  parties,  the  prisoner  of  none — The  four 
Assemblies :  elaborate  impotence — Universal  suffrage :  the  list 
of  notables,  the  plebiscites — The  Press  gagged — Bastilles  re- 
stored— "  The  Emperor's  pleasure " — Baleful  influence  of 
Napoleonism. 

I  3.  SOCIETY  AND  CULTURE  UNDER  NAPOLEON. — Society. — Settling 
down  after  the  Directoire — The  Consular  Court — The  Imperial 
Court — The  new  nobility — The  old  nobility — The  Austrian  mar- 
riage— Growing  disaffection  in  all  classes. 

Material  prosperity — Great  public  works — Agriculture  in 
progress — Industry  and  commerce  encouraged — Disastrous  ef- 
fect of  the  Continental  Blockade. 

Culture. — Transitional — "  Pompadour  culture  "  dying  out — 
Sciences  extremely  brilliant — Popular  literature. 

The  Eplgoni  of  classicism — Graeco-Roman  revival — Dullness 
of  literature — Stiffness  of  art — Insignificance  of  thought. 

The  dawn  of  romanticism — Medisevalism  and  the  Troubadour 
Style — Influence  of  foreign  literatures — Melancholy — Religiosity 
— The  army  as  a  school  of  picturesqueness — Romantic  elements 
in  Napoleon  himself. 


CONTENTS  11 


CHAPTER  III 

MM 

CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY   .  .  .  .  .89 

Unity  and  divisions  of  the  period. 

5  1.  THE  CRISIS  (1814-16). — The  first  Restoration— Failure  of  the 
Bourbons — The  Hundred  Days;  Waterloo — Embitter  the  feud 
between  France  and  Europe — Give  the  start  to  the  Napoleonic- 
democratic  legend — The  Second  Restoration:  the  White  Terror. 

|  2.  THE  RESTORATION  (1816-30). — Moderate  Liberalism  under 
Decazes,  1816-20 — Reaction  under  Villele,  1821-28 — Clerical- 
ism :  the  Jesuits,  the  "  Congregation  " — Revival  of  liberalism  in 
Europe  and  in  France — Return  to  liberalism  with  Martignac, 
1828-29 — Reaction  under  Polignac,  1829-30 — Fall  of  the  Bour- 
bons. 

I  3.  LOUIS-PHILIPPE  (1830-48). — The  Orleanist  compromise — In- 
fluence of  English  precedents — The  "  legal  country  "  ;  its  nar- 
row basis — Casimir  Perier  and  a  strong  government — Thiers, 
Guizot,  Broglie — Parliamentary  intrigues :  Thiers,  Guizot,  Molg 
— Guizot :  uncompromising  resistance — Fall  of  Louis-Philippe. 

f  4.  GENERAL  CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE  POLITICAL  REGIME. — 
Peaceful  policy :  under  the  Restoration ;  under  Louis-Philippe — 
Peace  at  any  price  coupled  with  Napoleon-worship. 

Bourgeois  oligarchy :  first  consequence :  the  people  driven  to 
secret  societies  and  insurrections — Second  consequence :  high 
tone  of  political  oratory — The  Press. 

i  5.  SOCIETY. — Balzac's  Human  Comedy  as  a  document :  merits 
and  limitations — The  aristocracy :  its  silver  age  under  the  Re- 
storation: sulks  under  Louis-Philippe — The  upper  bourgeoisie — 
Louis-Philippe's  Court — The  middle  and  lower  bourgeoisie :  its 
weaknesses  and  solid  virtues — Commerce  and  industry — Agri- 
culture. 

f  6.  CULTURE. — Romanticism — Its  origins — Its  four  phases — Sur- 
vival of  classicism — Popular  art  and  literature — Eclecticism. 


CHAPTER  IV 

NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  .  .  .  .  .124 

i  1.  POLITICAL  CONDITIONS  :  THE  REPUBLIC. — The  Revolution  of 
1848 — Democracy — Socialism — The  Constituent  Assembly — The 
Days  of  June — Reaction — Election  of  Louis-Napoleon:  its 
causes  and  its  meaning. 

i  2.  THE   COUP   D'ETAT   AND   THE   EMPIRE. — The   coup   d'etat:   its 
causes  and  significance — Influence  on  French  thought — Charac- 
ter  of    the    Second    Empire — Spiritual    gloom — Did    the    Empire 
stifle  intellectual  life? 
The  Roman  Question. 

§  3.  SOCIETY. — Documents:  literature;  the  Press;  graphic  docu- 
ments— Material  activity:  the  Saint-Simonian  spirit — Solidity 
of  this  prosperity — Glitter. 

Old    French    society— The    exiles — The    Court — The    pleasure- 
seekers — "L'homme  fort":  de  Morny. 


12  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

i  4.  CULTURE. — Reaction  and  materialism — Apparent  failure  of 
idealism — The  second  "  mal  du  si&cle  " — Gloom  not  due  to  the 
progress  of  science  and  industry. 

Realism:  brilliancy  of  art  and  literature — Science:  the  new 
spirit — Positivism  and  evolution — Three  moments:  1856,  1860, 
1867. 


CHAPTER  V 
THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913     .  .  .  .150 

i  1.  THE  "  TERRIBLE  TEAR,"  1870-71. — Causes  of  the  Franco- 
German  War — The  principle  of  nationalities — The  policy  of  com- 
pensations or  "  tips  " — Responsibility  of  the  whole  nation  in  the 
declaration,  preparation,  and  conduct  of  the  war — Sedan — Fall 
of  the  Empire. 

Government  of  National  Defence — Trochu — Gambetta — Fall 
of  Paris — Peace — National  Assembly. 

The  Commune :  causes,  character,  evolution — Repression — 
Influence. 

i  2.  RECUPERATION.  FOUNDATION  OF  THE  REPUBLIC.  CONQUEST 
OF  THE  REPUBLIC  BY  THE  REPUBLICANS. — Financial  recupera- 
tion: Thiers  and  the  liberation  of  the  Territory — Public  works 
— Military  and  diplomatic  recovery — 1878 :  the  Exposition  and 
the  Berlin  Congress;  France  resumes  her  position. 

Constitutional  reconstruction :  monarchical  majority,  but 
divided — MacMahon — Legitimist  Pretender  refuses  to  com- 
promise— Constitution  of  1875:  provisional  and  "omnibus." 

The  crisis  of  the  16th  of  May,  1877 — Failure  of  the  conserva- 
tives— Resignation  of  MacMahon — Conquest  of  the  Repulic  by 
the  Republicans. 

I  3.  THE  OPPORTUNIST  REPUBLIC,  1879-99. — Result  of  the  16th  of 
May:  annihilation  of  the  Presidency,  paralysis  of  the  Executive 
— The  Opportunists — The  group  system — Shifting  combinations 
and  coalition  Ministries — Crises:  Boulanger — The  colonial  ex- 
pansion— The  Russian  alliance. 

The  Freycinet  plan  of  public  works — Popular  education — 
Anti-clericalism. 

8  4.  THE  DREYFUS  CASE  AND  THE  RADICAL  BLOCK,  1899  seq. — The 
Dreyfus  case — Meaning  of  the  "  affair  " — Intensity  of  the  crisis 
— Waldeck-Rousseau,  Galliffet,  Millerand :  the  Ministry  of 
Republican  Defence — Anti-clerical  reprisals — Weakness  of  con- 
structive policy — Rupture  of  Radicals  and  Socialists. 
I  6.  SOCIETY. — Continuation  of  the  July  monarchy — The  aristoc- 
racy: an  impotent  survival — Democracy  not  yet  in  control — 
Rule  of  the  bourgeoisie — Extent  and  subdivisions  of  that  class 
— Social  prejudice  against  producers — Its  dangers  and  advan- 
tages. 

8  6.  CULTURE. — Continuation  of  realism — Influence  of  the  Terrible 
Year:  pessimism  (Talne)  ; — irony  (Renan) — Decadence? — Re- 
vival of  mysticism — Cultural  aspects  of  the  Dreyfus  crisis — 
Empirical  idealism. 


CONTENTS  13 

CHAPTER  VI 

PAGE 

THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  .....  186 

S  1.  FORMATION  AND  DEFORMATION  OF  BOURGEOIS  LIBERALISM, 
1789-1830. — The  Revolution — Property  a  sacred  right — Sup- 
pression of  feudalism — Importance  of  that  precedent — Absolute 
individualism  (Chapelier  law). 

The  Empire:  liberalism  degenerates  into  class  legislation — 
Napoleon  restores  bourgeois  corporations — The  "  livret  " — Arti- 
cle 1781. 

Survival  of  the  Compagnonnages — The  mutual  help  societies. 
i  2.  THE  JULY  MONARCHY,  1830-48.     GROWTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIAL- 
ISM.— First     development     of     mechanical     industries — "  Resist- 
ances " — The    Lyons    insurrection — Republican    secret    societies 
and  their  socialistic  tendencies. 

The  Utopian  Socialists :  Saint-Simon — Fourier — Cabet — Louis 
Blanc — Proudhon. 

i  3.  FROM  1848  TO  1871. — Socialism  in  1848 — The  national  work- 
shops— The  Days  of  June — The  Red  Fiend — The  coup  d'etat — 
Persecutions — Saint-Simonian  policy  of  Napoleon  III — Hostility 
of  the  industrial  workers  to  the  Empire — Liberal  legislation 
after  1860 — Prince  Napoleon  and  labour — The  working  men 
delegates  to  London — Origin  and  development  of  the  Interna- 
tional Working  Men's  Association. 

The  Commune. 

§  4.  SOCIALISM  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC. — Revival  of  socialism 
— Jules  Guesde  and  Lafargue — Division  into  sects — Millerand 
and  Jaures — The  Dreyfus  case :  impetus  it  gave  to  socialistic 
ideas — Millerand  in  Cabinet — Unification  in  1904— Rupture  with 
the  Radicals. 

Social  policy  of  the  Radicals :  mutualism. 

|  5.  SYNDICALISM,  ETC. — Syndicalism — Waldeck-Rousseau  law, 
1884 — Hostility  of  the  employers — Direct  action — The  "con- 
scious minority  " — The  general  strike — Kinship  to  anarchism 
— Violence. 

Syndicalism  and  the  State  Employees. 
The  Rural  Classes. 


CHAPTER  VII 
EDUCATION         .......  222 

i  1.  REVOLUTION  AND  EMPIRE. — Relation  of  educational  problem  to 
religion  and  politics — Education  on  the  eve  of  the  Revolution — 
Ruin  of  the  old  system — Abortive  plans — The  Central  Schools. 

Napoleon:    elementary    education    ignored — The    Lycges — The 
Facultes — The  University:   its  nature   and  purpose. 

§  2.  CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY. — The  Restoration — The  Univer- 
sity preserved — The  clerical  question — The  Sorbonne  trio — Ele- 
mentary education :  mutual  and  simultaneous  systems — The 
July  monarchy — Heyday  of  the  University — The  College  de 


14  CONTENTS 


France  trio  —  Attacks  of  the  Catholics  against  the  monopoly  — 
Guizot  law  on  elementary  education. 

8  3.  SECOND  REPUBLIC  AND  SECOND  EMPIRE.  —  The  Revolution  of 
1848  —  The  Falloux  law  on  the  liberty  of  education  —  Clerical 
influences  under  Napoleon  III  —  Reaction  under  Fortoul  —  Ad- 
mirable work  of  Victor  Duruy. 

|  4.  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC:  ELEMENTARY  EDUCATION.  —  Law  of 
1875  on  the  liberty  of  superior  education  —  Jules  Ferry,  Paul 
Bert  and  the  national  school  system  —  Anti-clericalism:  about 
1880  —  Revival  after  the  Dreyfus  case  —  The  neutrality  problem 

—  Achievements  of  the  Republic  —  Shortcomings. 

The  crisis  of  primary  education,  material  and  moral  —  Social- 
ism and  syndicalism  among  the  teachers. 
I  6.  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC:  SECONDARY  AND  SUPERIOR  EDUCATION. 

—  Secondary.  —  The  Church  holds  her  own  —  Reorganization  of  the 
course  —  The  reform  of  1902. 

Superior  education.  —  Creation  of  local  universities,  1896  —  Uni- 
versity of  Paris:  its  material  Importance  and  prestige  —  The 
provincial  unversities  —  Their  activities  —  Alleged  excess  of  the 
scientific  spirit  —  General  culture  outside  the  universities:  liter- 
ary lectures,  etc. 

Note  on  the  Popular  Universities. 


CHAPTER  VIII 
THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION       .....  256 

f  1.  REACTION,  1800-30. — The  war  of  the  Church  against  evil — 
Three  main  lines  of  conflict — Religious  situation  in  1800 — Rea- 
sons of  Bonaparte  for  negotiating  the  Concordat — Fosters 
Ultramontanism — Conflicts  arising  from  the  Concordat — Na- 
poleon excommunicated  and  the  Pope  imprisoned. 

Revival  of  Catholicism  in  French  thought  and  literature — 
Chateaubriand,  de  Maistre,  de  Bonald,  Lamennais. 

Alliance  of  the  Church  and  the  Ultra-Catholic  party — Cleri- 
calism and  anti-clericalism  under  Charles  X. 

|  2.  THE  GREAT  SCHISM,  1830-70. — 1830:  Liberal  Catholicism — 
Failure  of  Lamennais — Lacordaire  at  Notre-Dame — Montalem- 
bert  In  the  House  of  Peers — Attacks  against  the  University  and 
counter-attack  against  the  Jesuits — Conversion  of  the  great 
Romanticists  to  humanitarianism. 

1848 :  Temporary  reconciliation  between  the  Church  and 
democracy — Immediate  rupture — The  Roman  expedition  at 
home — The  coup  d'6tat  endorsed  by  the  Catholics — Slow  agony 
of  liberal  Catholicism — Uncompromising  policy  of  Pius  IX — 
The  Syllabus— Papal  Infallibility. 

|  3.  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC. — Religious  revival  after  the  war — 
Checked  by  clerical  and  political  intrigues — Anti-clericalism  and 
the  16th  of  May — Anti-clericalism  and  the  school  question — 
Leo  XIII  and  the  policy  of  reconciliation  with  the  modern  world 
— The  Rallies  and  the  "  New  Spirit " — The  Dreyfus  case  and 
religion — Anti-clerical  legislation  of  Waldeck-Rousseau — Emlle 
Combes  (Note  on  Freemasonry) — The  Concordat  breaks  down 


CONTENTS  15 

PAGE 

— Rupture — The  Separation  law — Hostility  to  the  Separation 
due  to  the  Roman  Curia. 

|  4.  MODERNISM. — Gratry  and  Maret,  forgotten  forerunners — 
Revival  of  Catholic  thought  and  sentiment  in  the  nineties — 
Vagueness  of  the  Modernist  attitude — Encyclical  Pascendi — 
Christian  democracy:  Abb6  Lemire — Marc  Sangnier  and  the 
"Furrow"  (Note  on  Count  de  Mun's  social  activities). 
i  5.  PROTESTANTISM.  ETC. — Protestantism  reorganized  under 
Napoleon — The  two  established  Churches — The  Revival  and  the 
Free  Evangelical  Churches — La  Revue  de  Strasbourg  and  lib- 
eral theology — Conflict  between  orthodox  and  liberals:  Coquerel 
and  Guizot — The  Declaration  of  Faith  of  1872 ;  schism — Hon- 
ourable but  unimportant  part  of  Protestantism  in  French  life. 

Judaism:  organized  under  Napoleon — Complete  emancipation 
after  1818 — Scholars  and  artists  among  French  Jews — Anti- 
Semitism:  Drumont  and  La  Libre  Parole — The  Dreyfus  case: 
minor  importance  of  anti-Semitism  (Note  on  the  Jews  in 
Algeria). 

Other  religions — Failure  of  new  Churches :  Gallicanism  (Abbe 
Chatel,  Father  Hyacinthe  Loyson) — Saint-Simonianism — Posi- 
tivism. 

Cousin's  eclecticism  as  the  "  natural  religion  "  of  the  middle 
classes — Its  long-continued  influence. 

Intense  interest  of  modern  France  in  religious  questions. 

CONCLUSION       .......  292 

Taking  stock — Liabilities:  (1)  The  falling  birth-rate — (2) 
War  danger  and  militarism — (3)  Alcoholism — (4)  Bourgeois 
pettiness — (5)  A  divided  soul;  latent  civil  war;  fits  of  fanati- 
cism and  cynical  indifference. 

Assets:  The  heritage — (1)  European  France — (2)  The 
Colonial  Empire — (3)  Hoarded  capital — (4)  Cultural  traditions 
—  (5)  Prestige — (6)  Evidences  of  undiminished  vitality. 

INDEX  .  302 


CHAPTEK   I 

THE  FOUNDATIONS 

THE  COUNTRY— THE  RACE— THE  TRADITION 
§  1.  THE  COUNTRY. 

The  theory  of  environment — Prance  :  situation — Size — Historical 
connection  with  the  Mediterranean  world — Geographical  affinities 
with  Northern  Europe — Mountainous  regions  and  basins — Extreme 
variety  of  aspects  and  climates :  the  main  regions — Natural  unity : 
the  r61e  of  the  depression  of  Poitou — But  unity  chiefly  a  historical 
achievement — Resources :  fertility  overrated  ;  harbours,  rivers,  and 
mineral  wealth  mediocre — But  many-sided,  well-balanced — The  hu- 
man factor  predominant. 

THAT  the  habitat  has  a  profound  influence  on  the  individual  and 
especially  on  the  race  was  a  favourite  conception  fifty  years  ago 
with  such  historians  as  Taine  and  Buckle.  Kenan  went  so  far 
as  to  make  geographical  conditions  responsible  for  the  religious 
beliefs  of  a  people :  "  The  desert,"  he  said,  "  is  monotheistic." 
Over  a  century  before,  Montesquieu  made  the  "  theory  of 
climates "  one  of  his  guiding  principles  in  the  interpretation 
of  history,  and  we  are  told  that  this  notion  can  be  traced, 
through  Jean  Bodin,  as  far  back  as  Hippocrates  himself.  The 
present  tendency  is  to  shift  the  emphasis  onto  the  concept  of 
race.  The  growth  of  Anglo-Saxon  communities  preserving  their 
essential  traits  under  the  most  various  skies,  the  coexistence  of 
widely  different  races  in  the  same  country,  seem  to  show  that 
physical- environment  is  only  one  of  the  factors  in  the  formation 
of  a  people,  and  probably  not  the  most  determinative.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  may  be  said  that  colonial  migrations  are  compara- 
tively recent,  and  that  the  wanderers  have  kept  in  touch  with 

17 


18     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

the  main  body  of  their  race,  which  preserved  its  traditions  and 
maintained  its  standard:  what  a  millennium  of  separate  exist- 
ence would  do  for  them  we  do  not  know.  Furthermore,  even 
though  environment  may  not  radically  influence  the  character  of 
the  race,  it  undoubtedly  affects  its  destiny  and  policy.  Had  the 
English  lived  for  centuries  in  the  centre  of  a  massive  continent, 
devoid  of  coal  and  intensely  hot,  their  racial  qualities  might  have 
been  the  same  as  at  present:  but  the  manifestations  of  their 
genius  would  obviously  have  been  different.  Let  us  therefore 
see  what  Nature  has  done  for  the  region  we  call  France,  and  to 
what  extent  geography  controls  or  explains  its  destinies. 

France  is  a  country  of  Western  Europe,  comprised  between 
51°  5'  and  42°  20'  of  latitude  N.,  and  in  longitude  between 
4°  42'  W.  and  7°  39'  E.  It  is  thus  almost  exactly  half-way 
between  the  North  Pole  and  the  Equator.  Practically  the  whole 
of  the  British  Isles  lies  north  of  France.  Germany  is  on  the 
average  5°  farther  north:  the  northernmost  point  in  France  is 
on  the  same  latitude  as  Dresden,  the  southernmost  point  in 
Germany  on  the  same  latitude  as  Dijon.  Within  the  same  zone 
in  the  Northern  Hemisphere  we  find  Central  and  Southern 
Germany,  Austria-Hungary,  .Southern  Eussia,  Turkestan,  the 
deserts  of  Mongolia  and  the  greater  part  of  Manchuria;  in 
America,  Oregon  and  Washington,  the  Great  Lakes,  New 
England,  and  the  part  of  Canada  which  was  once  New  France, 
from  Connecticut  to  Labrador.  On  account  of  the  influence  of 
the  Gulf  Stream  and  of  the  prevailing  west  winds,  the  greater 
part  of  France  is  more  temperate  than  its  latitude  would  suggest. 
France  is  in  the  heart  of  the  region  best  suited  to  the  develop- 
ment of  the  white  race. 

European  France,  without  its  North  African  provinces  and  its 
huge  colonial  dominions,  is  a  small  country  compared  with  such 
giants  as  the  Russian  Empire  (41  times  larger),  the  United 
States  or  Brazil  (16  and  17  times),  Australia  (13)  or  even 
Russia  in  Europe  (10|).  Texas  is  considerably  larger,  and 
California  not  much  smaller.  In  comparison  with  other  Western 
European  States,  France  does  not  look  so  insignificant.  It  is 
decidedly  inferior  only  to  Austria-Hungary.  The  difference 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  19 

in  favour  of  the  German  Empire  is  negligible  (Germany,  208,780 
square  miles;  France,  207,170).  The  British  Isles  are  barely 
three-fifths  the  size  of  France.  France  is  thus  too  large  ever  to 
fear  that  powerful  neighbours  will  absorb  her  or  turn  her  into 
their  satellite,  as  might  be  the  case  with  Denmark,  Holland,  or 
Belgium ;  but  it  is  not  a  huge,  self-contained  continent  or  sub- 
continent, capable  of  evolving  an  independent  culture.  It  is  an 
organic,  essential  part  of  a  larger  unit,  Western  Europe. 

By  far  the  most  important  point  in  this  connection  is  that 
France,  and  France  alone,  borders  at  the  same  time  on  the 
Mediterranean,  the  Atlantic,  and  the  North  Sea.  Thus  she 
is  both  a  Northern  and  a  Southern  Power,  but  not  in  the  same 
degree.  Historically,  the  whole  of  France  belongs  to  the 
Mediterranean  world,  of  which  Home  was  so  long  the  centre.  The 
valley  of  the  Khone  and  the  isthmus  of  Gascony  afforded  easy 
access  to  the  north  and  the  west,  as  far  as  the  Seine,  the  Rhine, 
and  the  Atlantic  Ocean.  Thus  Gaul  was  early  conquered  by 
Roman  arms,  Roman  law,  and  the  Latin  language.  But  this 
conquest  was  due  to  the  overwhelming  superiority  of  Roman 
civilization,  not  to  any  natural  unity  of  the  so-called  Latin  world. 
Geographically,  France  is  primarily  a  Northern  country  like 
England  and  Germany.  It  turns  its  back  on  the  rest  of  the 
Romania.  From  Italy  it  is  separated  by  the  highest  mountains 
in  Europe,  the  Alps;  from  Spain,  by  the  lower  but  less  acces- 
sible Pyrenees.  It  has  less  than  400  miles  of  coast  on  the 
Mediterranean,  against  700  on  the  North  Sea  and  the  Channel, 
and  865  on  the  Ocean.  The  western  half  of  that  Mediter- 
ranean coast  is  marshy  and  feverish;  the  eastern  half  is  cut 
off  from  the  rest  of  the  country  by  abrupt  and  barren  hills, 
or  even  by  mountains.  The  highroad  from  the  Mediterranean 
to  the  North,  the  Rhone  Valley,  is  fertile  enough,  but  exceedingly 
narrow;  the  river  is  abundant  and  picturesque,  but  impetuous 
and  almost  untamable — "  a  mad  bull  rushing  southward,"  as 
Michelet  called  it.  On  the  contrary,  between  France,  North 
Germany,  and  Belgium  there  are  no  natural  obstacles.  The 
Moselle,  the  Meuse,  the  Scheldt,  have  the  upper  part  of  their 
course  in  France.  The  north-eastern  boundary  of  France  is 
purely  artificial.  The  heart  of  French  power,  Paris,  is  far 


20     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

to  the   north.     France   was   thus   destined  to  be  the  country 
where  North  and  South  would  meet  and  blend. 

A  first  glance  at  a  relief  map  of  France  will  show  that  all  the 
mountains  and  high  plateaus  are  found  south  and  east  of  a  line 
drawn  from  Bayonne,  on  the  Gulf  of  Gascony,  to  Givet,  where 
the  Meuse  enters  Belgium.  However,  this  first  impression  is 
deceptive.  It  does  not  take  into  account  the  fact  that  Brittany 
is  a  mountainous  region  too,  but  worn  down  to  a  tableland  of 
moderate  height  by  centuries  of  active  erosion.  With  the  help 
of  geology  we  get  a  truer  conception  of  the  structure  of  France. 
In  the  north-west,  a  mass  of  granite,  Brittany,  with  its 
satellites,  Vendee,  Maine,  and  a  part  of  Normandy.*  In  the 
centre,  a  huge  triangular  mass  of  extinct  volcanoes  and  eruptive 
rocks — the  Central  Mountains  (Massif  Central;  Mont  Dore, 
6,188  feet),  buttressed  by  the  long  chain  of  the  Cevennes 
(Lozere,  5,584).  To  the  south,  the  abrupt  and  jagged  wall  of 
the  Pyrenees  (Vignemale,  10,820).  In  the  south-east,  the  Alps 
(Mont  Blanc,  15,800),  and,  north  of  the  Alps,  two  minor  ranges, 
the  wave-like  Jura  (5,500)  and  the  Vosges  with  their  character- 
istic domes  (4,480). 

These  masses  leave  between  them  room  for  three  main  basins 
of  varying  importance:  in  the  north,  the  Parisian  basin,  which 
comprises  all  the  watershed  of  the  River  Seine,  plus  the  middle 
course  of  the  Loire;  in  the  south-east,  the  basin  of  Bordeaux, 
in  the  plain  of  the  Garonne,  vast  and  rich,  but  less  extensive 
and  less  fortunately  situated  than  that  of  Paris ;  in  the  south-east, 
the  long  and  narrow  valley  of  the  lower  Rhone  and  the  Saone, 
a  great  highway  of  commerce,  but  so  cramped  between  the 
Cevennes  and  the  Alps  that  it  could  not  become  the  centre 
of  national  existence. 

These  four  mountain  regions  and  these  three  basins,  with 
their  innumerable  subdivisions,  present  a  remarkable  variety 
of  aspects,  infinitely  greater  than  could  be  found  on  a  similar 
area  cut  out  of  some  vast  geographical  unit  like  the  valley 

•  This  affords  a  curious  and  perhaps  fanciful  case  of  correlation  between 
geographical  and  historical  facts.  The  great  civil  war  In  the  West  during 
the  Revolution  raged  almost  exclusively  on  primary  rocks. 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  21 

of  the  Mississippi  or  the  Russian  plains.  France  is  both  a 
maritime  and  a  continental  country,  one  in  which  mountains 
and  level  stretches  alternate  in  constant  contrast.  It  is  an 
epitome  of  the  whole  of  Europe,  a  microcosm.  Too  often 
judged  by  the  old  domain  of  the  Capetians — the  Seine  and  the 
Middle  Loire — France  is  denned  as  an  amiable  land  of  well-tilled 
fields  and  gardens,  not  strikingly  picturesque,  moderate  in  all 
things,  essentially  sociable  and  civilized  in  the  character  of  its 
landscape  as  well  as  in  that  of  its  inhabitants.  This  tells  only 
one  part  of  the  tale.  It  leaves  out  Brittany,  with  its  tormented 
rocks  ever  assailed  by  a  wild  ocean;  the  Central  Mountains, 
whose  weird  beauty  was  discovered  by  Euskin  and  Stevenson, 
and  the  titanic  wall  of  the  Pyrenees.  The  highest  summit  of 
the  mighty  Alps,  Mont  Blanc,  is  on  French  soil,  and  the  purely 
French  Alps  of  Dauphiny  tower  as  high  and  are  even  more  sheer 
and  formidable  than  the  most  famous  Swiss  mountains.  The 
Rhone  Valley,  less  commercially  rich,  less  plentifully  advertised 
than  that  of  the  Rhine,  surpasses  it  in  (rugged  grandeur. 
Amenity,  harmony,  are  not  more  characteristic  of  France  as 
a  whole  than  uncouth  impressiveness  and  romantic  beauty.  In 
this  case,  as  in  many  others,  the  Isle-de-France,  Paris,  and  the 
garden  of  Touraine  fail  to  give  a  true  picture  of  the  rest  of 
the  country. 

Varied  in  its  aspects,  France  is  no  less  varied  in  its  climates. 
French  geographers  generally  recognize  seven.  The  Parisian 
or  Sequanian  region,  under  the  influence  of  its  northern  latitude, 
mitigated  by  its  proximity  to  the  Channel,  has  a  cool  climate 
(mean  temperature  50°),  equable  in  the  main,  but  offering 
constant  variations :  a  climate  of  samples,  which  fanciful  meteor- 
ologists liken  to  the  proverbial  fickleness  of  the  Parisian  mind. 
Rains  are  light  but  frequent;  they  often  make  winter  slushy 
rather  than  severe,  and  summer  as  cool  and  wet  as  spring.  The 
Breton  or  Armorican  climate,  under  the  influence  of  the  Gulf 
Stream,  is  a  little  warmer  (51 '8°)  and  decidedly  maritime:  cool 
summers  that  do  not  allow  the  vine  to  thrive,  very  mild  winters, 
frequent  mists  and  rains.  The  Girondin  climate  reigns  over 
Poitou  and  the  basin  of  the  Garonne.  It  is  also  a  maritime 
climate,  mild  and  seldom  too  dry,  but,  on  account  of  its  more 


22     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-rn  CENTURY 

southern  position,  warmer  and  sunnier  than  that  of  Brittany 
(53 '6°) ;  it  is  ideally  suitable  for  wine,  fruit,  and  cereals.  The 
Central  Mountains  vary  in  climate  according  to  their  exposure, 
altitude,  and  geological  formation;  on  the  whole,  the  Auvergne 
climate  is  cool  (51°)  but  extreme;  summers  may  be  locally 
scorching,  winters  are  almost  invariably  very  hard.  .Snow,  rare 
and  light  in  the  West  and  South  of  France,  here  falls  heavily  and 
covers  the  ground  for  months.  The  Vosgian  or  eastern  climate, 
embracing  northern  Franche-Comte,  eastern  Burgundy  and 
Champagne,  and  the  whole  of  Lorraine,  is  typically  continental, 
with  long  sharp  winters,  brief  and  hot  summers  which  enable 
the  vine  to  prosper  on  favoured  hill-sides  (average  48  -2°).  The 
Rhodanian  or  Lyonnese  climate,  farther  south  and  on  a  lower 
altitude,  but  uninfluenced  by  the  sea  and  hemmed  in  by  moun- 
tains, is  warmer  (51-8°),  extreme,  changeable,  with  abundant 
rains.  The  Mediterranean  climate,  by  far  the  warmest  (57-5°), 
offers  mild  winters,  long,  dry  summers,  when  nature  assumes 
that  appearance  of  deadness  so  characteristic  of  Northern  Africa 
or  the  South- Western  United  States;  a  "choleric"  climate 
withal,  as  Michelet  would  have  it,  with  sudden  downpours  and 
thunderstorms,  with  winds  raging  from  the  Mediterranean  or 
down  the  air-shaft  of  the  Rhone  Valley.  Sheltered  by  the 
Alps,  the  Riviera  in  winter  is  a  paradise. 

In  spite  of  this  endless  diversity,  France  presents  an 
undeniable  character  of  unity.  The  seven  or  more  great 
regions  which  we  have  sketched  would  have  formed  separate 
geographical  entities,  had  not  communications  been  comparatively 
easy  between  them.  From  the  Mediterranean  to  the  Ocean, 
the  pass  of  Naurouze  (640  feet)  offers  such  convenient  access  into 
the  Garonne  Valley  at  Toulouse  that  a  canal  was  built  through 
it  as  early  as  the  days  of  Louis  XIV.*  There  are  only  a  few 
miles  from  the  Rhone  to  the  Upper  Loire,  while  the  Saone  has 
long  been  connected  by  waterways  with  the  Middle  Loire, 
the  Upper  Seine  and  the  Rhine.  Most  important  of  all  is  the 
depression  of  Poitou:  had  it  not  been  so  wide  and  so  level, 

•  Its  transformation  into  a  ship  canal,  "  Canal  des  Deux-Mers,"  has  even 
b«en  repeatedly  proposed. 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  23 

the  Garonne  Valley  and  the  whole  South- West,  as  rich  and  for 
a  long  time  more  cultured  than  Northern  France,  would  have 
maintained  or  recovered  its  independence,  which  it  lost  through 
the  crusade  against  the  Albigensians.  The  fate  of  France  was 
often  decided  on  the  fields  which  stretch  between  Orleans, 
Tours  and  Poitiers  (Attila;  Clovis;  Charles  Martel;  Hundred 
Years  War;  1871,  etc.). 

Thus  the  country,  such  as  we  know  it,  seems  to  us  remarkably 
well-balanced,  and  Strabo  came  to  the  same  conclusion  many 
centuries  ago.  Its  rich  contrasts  do  not  amount  to  antinomies. 
There  are  practically  no  centrifugal  tendencies:  even  Brittany, 
manifestly  different,  but  too  small  to  live  apart  and  with  no 
other  neighbour  but  France,  has  no  desire  to  secede.  However, 
we  should  not  exaggerate  the  "  natural  "  unity  of  France.  It  is 
easy  to  see  a  posteriori  how  the  different  regions  came  together 
and  remained  together — but  would  not  other  formations  have 
been  possible?  This  not  only  in  the  North-East,  where  the 
arbitrary  political  frontier  takes  little  account  of  natural  or 
linguistic  boundaries,  but  even  in  the  South-East  and  the 
South-West.  France  is  the  result  of  physical  geography,  no 
doubt,  but  also  of  an  equilibrium  between  contending  influences 
of  races  and  cultures,  and  perhaps  still  more  of  a  definite  long- 
continued  policy.  What  holds  France  together  is  the  Capetian 
tradition  first  of  all,  then  the  principles  and  souvenirs  of  the 
Revolution  and  a  strictly  centralized  form  of  government.  This 
centralization  system  we  take  to  be  one  of  the  causes,  rather 
than  the  result,  of  national  unity.  The  Convention,  which  had 
so  deep  an  instinct  of  French  tradition,  fought  like  grim  death 
for  the  indivisibility  of  the  Republic,  against  all  federalists. 
France  is  the  product  of  the  human  will — the  will  of  kings  at 
first,  then  the  will  of  the  people. 

It  remains  for  us  to  examine  what  resources  France  offers 
to  its  inhabitants.  In  spite  of  a  widespread  and  flattering 
prejudice,  France  was  by  no  means  bountifully  endowed  by 
nature.  Barren  mountains  cover  nearly  one-third  of  her 
territory.  Except  for  her  narrow  golden  belt,  Brittany  is 
sterile.  The  Landes  are  vast  tracts  of  shifting  dunes,  partly 


24     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-m  CENTURY 

reclaimed  under  the  Second  Empire.  There  are  traces  in 
Sologne  and  the  Dombes  of  the  marshes  that  once  covered  a  large 
portion  of  the  country.  Almost  at  the  gate  of  Paris,  Champagne 
Pouilleuse  (beggarly)  is  a  bare,  bleak  plain.  No  part  of  France 
compares  in  rank  luxuriance  with  the  tropics,  or  in  inexhaustible 
agricultural  wealth  with  the  Chinese  loess,  the  Russian  tcherno- 
zion,  the  valleys  of  the  Nile  and  of  the  Po.  Much  of  the 
present  fertility  of  France  is  due  to  unremitting  labour :  hence 
the  peculiar  love  of  the  French  peasant  for  that  soil  which 
requires  such  efforts,  but  repays  them  without  stint. 

Neither  is  France  ideally  well  favoured  for  commerce.  Its 
position  on  four  seas  is  advantageous.  But,  compared  with 
England,  Japan,  Italy  or  Greece,  its  shape  is  massive,  its  coast- 
line small  in  proportion  to  the  total  area,  and,  in  consequence, 
its  coast-wise  trade  comparatively  unimportant.  The  most 
maritime  province,  Brittany,  is  the  most  un-French.  There 
are  few  good  natural  harbours.  Brest,  the  best  in  spite  of 
a  dangerous  pass,  is  far  from  all  centres  of  production.  Le 
Havre  is  ever  on  the  defensive:  the  sea,  it  was  aptly  said,  is 
British  at  heart:  it  scours  the  English  coast,  deepens  its 
harbours,  and  chokes  with  silt  their  French  rivals.  As  a 
highway  of  commerce,  the  longest  river,  the  Loire,  is  almost 
useless;  the  most  abundant,  the  Ehone,  is  too  much  of 
a  torrent  ever  to  rival  the  Rhine  or  the  Elbe;  the  Garonne 
is  worse  than  mediocre;  the  unassuming  Seine  alone  is  excellent 
and  capable  of  almost  indefinite  improvement.  Already  as 
smooth  and  regular  as  a  canal,  11  feet  deep  as  far  as  Paris, 
it  could  easily  be  made  accessible  to  large  sea-going  vessels. 

France  is  poor  in  minerals.  Precious  metals  are  almost 
non-existent;  coal,  "the  bread  of  industry,"  is  found  only  in 
a  few  districts,  especially  in  the  North,  in  geological  formations 
more  broken  and  more  expensive  to  work  than  in  England. 
The  total  output  amounted  in  1911  only  to  38  million  tons, 
against  455  in  America,  268  in  England,  234  in  Germany.  Iron 
is  more  abundant,  especially  since  the  discovery  of  the  rich  basin 
of  Briey  in  Lorraine.  But  iron  and  coal  are  not  found  side 
by  side,  and  there  is  no  cheap  way  of  conveying  the  one 
to  the  other.  The  proposed  North-Eastern  Canal,  between 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  25 

the  metallurgic  basin  of  Lorraine  and  the  coalfields  of  the 
North,  would  be  an  extremely  difficult  and  costly  piece  of 
engineering. 

These  facts  may  explain  both  the  small  density  of  the  French 
population,  lower  than  that  of  all  its  neighbours  except  Spain, 
and  the  thrifty,  hardworking,  cautious  character  of  the  people. 
France  is  a  country  where  gambling  and  large  ventures,  as  a 
rule,  do  not  pay.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  French  are  unduly 
conservative  and  even  timid  in  business;  but  the  less  rapid 
growth  of  their  commerce  and  industry  within  the  last  thirty  years, 
compared  with  the  substantial  progress  of  England  and  the  giant 
strides  of  America  and  Germany,  is  due  primarily  to  natural 
causes  which  they  have  done  wonders  to  overcome. 

On  the  other  hand,  France  is  well-rounded  in  its  economic 
life,  almost  self-supporting,  at  the  mercy  neither  of  foreign 
supplies  nor  of  one  exclusive  national  staple.  It  offers  a 
sufficiency  of  all  essentials  —  bread,  vegetables,  fruit ;  the  French 
would  add,  wine— all  of  excellent  quality.  Beef  and  mutton 
can  hardly  compare  with  the  English  products:  but  poultry 
is  plentiful,  and  "  la  poule  au  pot,"  which  good  King  Henry 
wished  every  one  of  his  subjects  to  enjoy  of  a  Sunday,  is  a  tooth- 
some dish.  Long  centuries  of  civilization  have  given  France 
industrial  treasures  as  precious  as  coal  and  iron:  an  artistic 
tradition  and  generations  of  skilled  craftsmen.  Owing  to  the 
immense  variety  of  her  resources,  although  each  in  particular 
may  seem  mediocre,  France  weathers  industrial  crises  better 
than  her  more  venturesome  and  reckless  rivals. 

In  other  words,  nature  in  France  is  not  oppressive.  It  did 
not  lay  upon  man  too  heavy  a  curse,  nor  did  it  demoralize  him 
through  excessive  bounty.  The  result  is  that  in  France  the 
human  factor  is  all  important:  there  are  no  geographical 
influences  that  can  be  traced  inevitably.  It  has  been  said  that 
the  oppressive  splendour  of  Indian  nature  was  "  pantheistic  " ; 
that  the  awful  simplicity  of  the  desert  was  "monotheistic"; 
if  we  wanted  to  express  in  the  same  fanciful  style  the  well- 
balanced,  almost  negative  quality  of  nature  in  France, 
"  rationalism "  is  the  word  that  would  immediately  come  to 
our  mind. 


26     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

§  2.  THE  RACE. 

(a)  Language. — Romanic  or  Neo-Latin — Flemish,  Breton,  Basque— ^ 
North  and  South,  langue  d'oil  and  langue  d'oc;  supremacy  of 
Northern  French  undisputed — French  beyond  the  limits  of  France — 
Restricted  significance  of  language  affinity. 

(b)  Historical  Ethnography. — Celtiberians,  Gauls,  Romans,  Franks 
— Minor  elements:  Greeks  and  Arabs — Constant  infiltration — Polish 
and  Italian  refugees — The  Jews — Same  basic  elements  as  in  England 
— Proportions  undeflnable — The  Celtic  problem  as  an  example  of 
ethnographic  confusion. 

The  study  of  European  races  has  been  likened  to  a  quagmire. 
In  hardly  any  other  question  has  such  havoc  been  wrought 
by  loose  thinking  applied  to  insufficient  or  conflicting  data. 
"  Anthroposociology "  has  in  many  cases  been  naught  but  the 
pedantic  glorification  of  popular  prejudices.  The  brilliant  and 
suggestive  works  of  Vacher  de  Lapouge,  Gustave  Lebon,  Houston 
Stewart  Chamberlain,  for  instance,  are  often  marred  by  the  asser- 
tiveness  common  to  pseudo-sciences  and  to  sciences  in  the 
making.  The  very  term  "  race  "  is  exceedingly  vague.  When 
we  speak  of  Aryans,  .Semites,  Mongolians;  of  Slavs,  Celts,  and 
Teutons;  of  Latins  and  Anglo-Saxons,  we  have  three  or  four 
widely  different  conceptions  in  our  minds.  Race  is  often  used 
for  linguistic  group :  a  pernicious  confusion  to  which  we  owe  the 
myths  of  "Aryan"  and  "Latin"  races.  Anglo-Saxon  is  a 
purely  historical  term,  which  denotes  but  two  elements  in  the 
make-up  of  an  extremely  complex  population.  Celt  and  Teuton 
may  refer  to  linguistic  differences,  but  also  to  somatological 
differences,  such  as  stature,  pigmentation,  and  the  shape  of  the 
skull.  Finally,  the  French  or  the  Spanish  "  race,"  for  instance, 
means  nothing  but  France  or  Spain  considered  as  an  ethnic  unit. 
Three  thousand  years  of  migrations,  wars,  and  peaceful  inter- 
course have  tangled  European  conditions  to  such  a  point  that 
linguistic,  ethnic,  anthropological,  and  political  boundaries  are 
seldom,  if  ever,  found  to  coincide. 

(a)  Language. 

The  French  speak  a  Romanic  or  Neo-Latin  language,  like  the 
Italians,  the  Spaniards,  the  Portuguese,  and  the  Rumanians. 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  27 

Let  us  note  that  France  has  not  yet  achieved  the  degree  of 
linguistic  unity  she  is  often  credited  with.  First  of  all,  there  are 
three  allogenic  groups.  The  Flemings  in  the  North  use  a  Low- 
German  dialect,  in  almost  every  respect  similar  to  Dutch. 
Brittany,  after  adopting  Latin  like  the  rest  of  Gaul,  was  re- 
Celticized  in  the  fifth  century  by  invaders  from  Cornwall,  and 
Bas-Breton  is  but  slowly  receding  before  French.  The  Basques, 
astride  on  the  Western  Pyrenees,  still  preserve  their  mysterious 
language,  Euskara  or  Euskaldunac,  apparently  unrelated  even  to 
the  other  agglutinative  tongues  in  Europe,  Finnish  and  Magyar. 
These  heterogeneous  elements  are  of  no  great  significance  in 
French  national  life.  Within  the  Eomania  proper,  the  dialects 
of  Nice  and  Corsica  are  undoubtedly  more  closely  related  to 
Italian  than  to  Northern  French,  thus  lending  some  colour  to 
the  claims  of  the  "  Irredentists " ;  whilst  Catalan,  spoken  in 
French  Pyrenees  Orientales  as  well  as  in  the  most  industrial 
part  of  Spain,  is  no  less  evidently  akin  to  Provengal  rather  than 
to  Castilian.  More  important  is  the  fact  that  French  is  still 
divided  into  Northern  and  Southern,  Langue  d'oil  and  Langue 
d'oc,  Francien  and  Provengal.  The  boundary,  broadly  speak- 
ing, starts  from  the  Gironde  and  ends  near  Berne  in  Switzer- 
land, by  way  of  Angouleme,  Montmorillon,  Montlugon,  Lyons, 
and  the  crests  of  the  Jura ;  but  many  border  dialects  are  of  such 
mixed  character  that  no  very  definite  line  can  be  drawn.  At 
every  turn  we  meet  this  profound  difference  between  North  and 
South,  with  Poitou  as  a  debatable  borderland  between  them. 
But  this  linguistic  division  is  not  the  cause  of  any  political 
difficulty.  The  official  status  of  Northern  French  is  nowhere 
challenged,  and  there  is  no  threat  of  national  or  cultural  disrup- 
tion in  the  revival  of  Provengal  literature.  In  spite  of  Mistral's 
genius,  one  may  doubt  whether  there  be  any  future  for  the 
eclectic  and  artificial  literary  medium  which  he  and  his  friends 
created,  by  ransacking  the  lore  of  many  provinces  and  many 
centuries. 

While -French  is  not  the  sole  language  spoken  in  France,  its 
domain  extends  beyond  the  French  boundaries.  In  Belgium 
the  southern  provinces  speak  Walloon,  a  French  dialect,  with 
Liege  as  its  stronghold  and  Brussels  as  its  northern  limit. 


28     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

About  half  of  German  Lorraine,  round  Metz,  and  a  few  villages 
in  Alsace  are  French  of  speech  as  well  as  French  of  heart. 
French  is  the  language  of  some  700,000  Swiss  in  Neuchatel  and 
Vaud,  as  well  as  parts  of  Fribourg  and  Valais.  The  upper 
valley  of  Aosta,  in  Italy,  also  speaks  French.  Even  in  the 
Flemish  parts  of  Belgium  and  in  Alsace,  in  spite  of  political 
hostility  on  the  part  of  "  Flamingants  "  and  Pangermanists,  the 
upper  classes  are  bilingual.  The  same  is  true  of  Luxemburg,  of 
large  sections  of  Switzerland,  and  especially,  until  recent  times, 
of  Rumania.  But  this  leads  us  into  the  cultural  diffusion  of 
French,  which  has  nothing  to  do  with  race,  and  will  be  discussed 
in  its  place. 

Language  affinity  is  a  bond  the  historical,  sentimental,  and 
practical  importance  of  which  we  have  no  desire  to  minimize. 
Yet,  in  the  nineteenth  century  at  least,  French  thought  and 
French  life  were  much  more  deeply  influenced  by  England  and 
Germany,  and  even  by  Scandinavia  and  Russia,  than  by  Spain 
or  Italy,  and  it  can  be  shown  that  England,  during  the  same 
period,  kept  in  closer  touch  with  Italy  than  France  did.  The 
use  of  related  languages  need  not  imply  any  moral  or  mental 
similarity.  To  bracket  together  as  "  Latin  "  traits  the  fortitude 
and  impassiveness  of  ancient  Eome,  the  artistic  joyousness  of 
modern  Italy,  Spain's  gloomy  pride  and  mysticism,  France's  wit 
and  logic,  would  be,  to  say  the  least,  venturesome.  Still  less 
are  kindred  tongues  the  evidence  of  descent  from  the  same  stock. 
The  common  "  Latinity "  of  a  Rumanian  and  a  Portuguese 
proves  no  closer  blood  relationship  than  could  be  traced  between 
a  Lowland  Scot  and  an  Alabama  negro — who  both  speak  English 
dialects.  Language  is  a  historical  and  a  cultural,  but  not 
properly  a  racial,  factor. 

(b)  Historical  Ethnography. 

Shall  we  come  to  a  more  correct  conception  if  we  attempt  to 
give  the  "  ethnic  formula  "  of  a  nation,  in  other  words,  if  we 
enumerate  the  ingredients  which  contributed  to  its  formation  in 
the  course  of  history?  In  France  we  find  layer  upon  layer  of 
invaders.  France  is  attractive  and  accessible;  it  is  the  western 
extremity  of  the  immense  series  of  plains  which  stretch  across 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  29 

the  north  of  Europe  and  Asia;  and  it  ever  was  the  easiest  high- 
way from  North  to  South.  The  Gauls,  whatever  they  may  have 
been,  were  neither  aborigines  nor  even,  perhaps,  the  first  con- 
querors of  the  land.  The  primitive  inhabitants  are  often  referred 
to — darkly — as  Celtiberians,  and  the  Basques  are  sometimes  held 
to  be  a  remnant  of  these  early  occupiers  of  the  soil.  After  the 
Gauls  came  the  Eomans,  who  subdued  the  south  of  the  country 
from  154  to  121  B.C.  (Gallia  Braccata  or  Narbonensis,  modern 
Provence)  and  the  rest,  as  far  as  the  Rhine,  under  Julius  Caesar, 
from  58  to  51  B.C.  Four  centuries  later,  after  a  long  period  of 
gradual  infiltration,  sometimes  checked,  sometimes  encouraged 
by  Rome,  Gaul  was  flooded  with  migrating  Barbarians.  The 
Visigoths,  the  Burgundians,  and  the  Franks  took  up  their  abode 
in  the  land.  The  invasions,  properly  so-called,  ended  with  the 
repulse  of  the  Huns  and  of  the  Avars.  In  the  ninth  and  tenth 
centuries  the  Northmen  harried  the  coasts,  penetrated  far  inland 
along  the  valleys  of  the  Seine  and  of  the  Loire,  and  finally 
secured  the  rich  province  which  still  bears  their  name  (Normandy) . 
The  prehistoric  and  shadowy  Celtiberians,  the  Gauls,  the 
Romans,  the  Franks,  and  the  Northmen,  such  are  the  main 
elements  of  the  French  people.  All  other  historical  influences 
are  so  small  as  to  be  almost  negligible.  The  Greeks  founded 
several  cities  on  the  Mediterranean  shore — Nice,  Monaco, 
Antibes,  and  especially  Massilia — Marseilles.  The  Arabs, 
defeated  by  Charles  Martel,  occupied  Aquitania  for  some  time, 
and  to  their  sojourn  some  ethnographers  ascribe  the  sporadic 
existence  of  Saracenic  types  among  the  Southern  peasantry. 
There  is  practically  no  trace  of  the  protracted  English  tenure  of 
Guienne,  nor  of  Spanish  rule  in  Franche-Comte.  All  invasions 
of  France  since  the  Hundred  Years  War  were  so  short  and  of 
so  purely  military  a  nature  that  they  could  not  affect  the  popula- 
tion in  any  perceptible  degree.  More  important  than  all 
spectacular  crises  are  the  constant  and  silent  migrations  which 
have  never  completely  ceased  in  modern  times  and  continue  to 
the  present  day.  Throughout  the  nineteenth  century  France 
has  attracted  Poles,  Russians,  and  Italians,  driven  from  their 
countries  by  the  tyranny  of  the  Tsars  or  of  Austria.  The 
number  of  these  refugees  was  never  very  large,  but  they  were  an 


30     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

elite,  and  Polish  names  in  particular  are  not  infrequent  among 
French  writers  and  scientists.  The  immigration  of  common 
labourers  is  surprisingly  small,  in  view  of  the  facts  that  France 
is  both  richer  and  more  sparsely  populated  than  her  neighbours, 
and  that  there  is  no  legal  restraint  to  the  inflowing  of  foreign 
workmen.  Belgians,  Italians,  and  Poles,  however,  are  an  ever- 
increasing  factor  even  in  rural  districts  at  harvest-time,  and 
especially  in  industrial  centres.  The  fear  that  Germany  might 
conquer  the  rest  of  Lorraine,  Champagne,  and  Franche-Comt6 
by  a  process  of  endosmosis  seems  unfounded.  Modern  Germany, 
in  spite  of  the  tremendous  increase  in  her  population,  has  no 
men  to  spare;  and  in  German  as  well  as  in  French  Lorraine,  it 
has  been  found  necessary  to  call  in  Polish  and  Italian  labour  to 
work  the  newly  developed  iron  mines.  The  French  have  abso- 
lute faith  in  their  power  of  assimilation,  and  the  presence  of  a 
hundred  thousand  Germans  in  Paris  is  a  factor  of  lasting  peace 
between  the  two  neighbours. 

Shall  we  count  the  Jews  among  these  foreign  elements  ?  That 
would  be  an  error  as  well  as  an  injustice,  for  the  French  Jews, 
some  60,000  altogether,  do  not  in  any  way  stand  apart  from  the 
rest  of  the  population.  This  was  not  exactly  the  case  with  the 
Alsatian  Jews  before  1871 ;  this  is  not  the  case  either  with  the 
extremely  small  international  aristocracy  of  finance;  Algeria,  of 
course,  has  her  own  problem ;  and  we  are  told  that  within  the  last 
few  years  Paris  has  been  developing  a  Ghetto  in  the  Saint- 
Gervais  district.  But  the  Franco-Jewish  families  of  old  standing 
are,  as  a  rule,  well-to-do  rather  than  wealthy,  and  less  prominent 
in  the  commercial  world  than  in  the  professions,  literature,  and 
science.  Even  the  well-known  racial  type  has  become  so  attenu- 
ated as  to  be  barely  perceptible.  In  the  Dreyfus  case,  as  we 
shall  see,  Antisemitism  proper  played  a  minor  part,  and  Drumont's 
Libre  Parole  is  a  vox  clamantis  in  deserto. 

Curiously  enough,  the  ethnic  components  of  the  French  people 
are  exactly  the  same  as  those  of  the  English,  viz.,  primitive 
Celts,  Eoman  conquerors,  German  invaders.  The  community  of 
origin  was  made  all  the  closer  by  the  Norman  conquest.  The 
army  of  William,  made  up  of  adventurers  from  all  Northern 
France,  was  not  Scandinavian,  but  French.  This  may  account 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  31 

for  the  brown  eyes  of  a  large  proportion  of  the  British  aristo- 
cracy, recognized  by  the  Teutomaniac  Chamberlain.  We  must 
say  that  in  both  cases,  Britain  and  France,  we  do  not  know  in 
•what  proportions  the  original  elements  were  mingled.  Moreover, 
as  Lapouge  and  Ammon  were  able  to  prove,  a  very  slight  differ- 
ence in  the  prolificity  or  mortality  of  these  various  elements  would 
be  sufficient  radically  to  alter  their  numerical  relation  within  a  few 
centuries.  The  French  are  in  the  main  Gallo-Eomano-Franks : 
but  we  cannot  give  any  exponents  to  the  terms  of  this  formula. 

Furthermore,  the  present  tendency  among  historians  is  to 
minimize  the  importance  of  invasions.  These  movements, 
which  loom  so  large  in  chronicles  and  traditions,  seem  to  have 
affected  only  a  small  proportion  of  the  population.  The  Gauls 
were  only  a  ruling  class.  The  Eomans,  north  of  the  Alps,  were 
very  few ;  even  the  veterans  and  traders  who  settled  in  the  country 
were  not  necessarily  of  Roman  blood.  The  Franks  proper  were 
but  a  tribe.  Even  the  cultural  influence  of  conquest  is  often 
overstated.  Gaul  was  evolving  a  stage  of  culture  very  similar 
to  that  of  Rome  when  its  development  was  absorbed  by  that  of 
the  Imperial  City.  Fustel  de  Coulanges  tried  to  prove  that  the 
Germanic  invasions  were  not  responsible  for  the  rise  of  feudalism. 
In  history  as  well  as  in  geology,  cataclysmic  theories  are  more 
and  more  abandoned. 

For  a  century  and  a  half,  from  Boulainvilliers  to  Augustin 
Thierry  and  even  to  Henri  Martin,  the  attempt  was  repeatedly 
made  to  use  ethnography  as  a  key  to  history.  Sieyes  cried  out 
against  the  French  aristocracy :  "  Let  us  send  them  back  to  their 
German  marshes,  whence  they  came ! "  Many  considered  the 
Revolution  of  1830  as  the  final  emancipation  of  the  Gallo- 
Romans  held  in  subjection  by  the  Franks  since  the  sixth  century. 
These  theories  are  fanciful  in  the  extreme.  Long  before  the  end 
of  the  Middle  Ages  the  nobility  had  been  racially  assimilated  to 
the  rest  of  the  population.  Nay,  it  had  probably  been  renewed 
in  its  entirety,  not  once  but  several  times,  and  particularly 
during  the.  Crusades.  There  is  no  sign  that  at  the  time  of  the 
Revolution  the  nobility  had  any  purer  "  Frankish "  blood  in 
their  veins  than  the  bourgeoisie. 

Let  us  note  finally  that  the  historical  migrations  of  peoples 


32     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

are  not  always  a  clue  to  the  present  distribution  of  types  and 
races.  This  difficulty  is  best  exemplified  by  the  Celtic  question. 
The  ancients,  Caesar  in  particular,  described  the  Celts  or  Gauls 
(for  they  used  the  terms  almost  indiscriminately)  as  a  tall,  ruddy 
race.  This  description  corresponds  to  our  present  conception  of 
the  Teutons.  Chamberlain  considers  the  original  Celts,  Slavs, 
and  Germans  as  all  equally  Teutonic.  The  very  Teutons  who 
joined  the  Cimbri  were  possibly  a  Celtic  tribe.  Linguistically, 
Celtic  denotes  a  number  of  languages  driven  to  the  extreme 
verge  of  Western  Europe — one  just  dead  in  Cornwall,  others 
dying  or  fighting  for  life  in  Brittany,  Wales,  Ireland,  and 
Scotland.  Eacially,  there  are  few  peoples  standing  farther  apart 
than  those  who  speak  Celtic  languages:  the  Bretons  are  much 
more  akin  to  the  Auvergnats,  the  Bavarians,  and  the  Russians 
than  to  the  Irish  or  the  Scotch. 

§  3.  THE  RACE  (continued). 

(c)  Anthropology. — Criteria— Limitations — The  Nordic,  Celto-Slavic, 
and  Mediterranean  races  in  France — The  French  a  racial  medley — 
Their  unity  an  act  of  will. 

(d)  Psychology  of  the  French  People. — Collective  psychology  may 
be  a  delusion,  but  has  formative  influence — (1)   Cheerfulness — (2) 
Nervous  temperament — True  of  Paris  and  the  South,  not  of  France 
as  a  whole — (3)    Sociability — (4)   Intellectualism — These  traits  the 
result  of  France's  natural  heterogeneity  and  self-conquered  unity — 
They  veil,  but  do  not  destroy,  the  common  human  substratum. 

(e)  Note:  Race  from  the  Eugenic  Point  of  View. — Racial  decay? 
— The  alleged  lowering  of  the  stature — The  falling  birth-rate. 

(c)  Anthropology. 

So  we  now  turn  from  historical  ethnography  to  anthropology, 
which  with  callipers,  measuring  tape,  and  colour  scale,  ought  to 
give  us  definite  data.  Many  tests  can  be  applied:  stature,  build 
(stocky  or  slender),  pigmentation  (skin,  hair,  and  eyes),  shape  of 
the  skull  and  face  (facial  index,  facial  angle,  cephalic  index), 
form  of  the  nose,  texture  of  the  hair,  etc.  For  the  distinction 
of  races,  stature,  pigmentation,  and  the  cephalic  index  combined 
are  the  criteria  generally  adopted.* 

•  Cephalic  index :  simply  the  breadth  of  the  head  above  the  ears  ex- 
pressed in  percentage  of  its  length  from  forehead  to  back.  As  the  head 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  33 

We  should  bear  in  mind  from  the  outset  that  there  are 
extremely  few  pure  specimens,  i.e.,  individuals  in  whom  all  the 
characteristics  of  a  given  type  are  actually  found  together.  The 
"  races  "  defined  by  anthropologists  are  more  or  less  ideal  con- 
ceptions. Ammon  wrote  to  Eipley  that  out  of  thousands  of 
heads  he  had  measured  in  Baden,  a  stronghold  of  the  Alpine 
race,  he  could  not  find  a  single  perfect  specimen  of  that  type. 
The  truth  is  that  if  the  different  varieties  of  Europeans  are  con- 
sidered as  races,  we  are  all  mongrels.  This  is  truer  of  rich 
and  accessible  countries  than  of  "  centres  of  isolation "  like 
Scandinavia  and  Corsica ;  truer  of  the  aristocracy  and  the  profes- 
sions, easily  cosmopolitan,  than  of  the  common  people.  That 
no  excessive  faith  can  be  placed  in  the  cephalic  index  alone  is 
made  evident  by  a  curious  fact:  the  Basques  and  the  Jews  are 
among  the  most  strongly  individualized  races  in  the  world, 
isolated,  the  former  in  their  mountainous  habitat  and  their 
mysterious  language,  the  latter  as  a  result  of  their  religion  and 
of  the  universal  popular  prejudice  against  them.  As  types,  they 
are  unmistakable.  Yet  their  cephalic  index  varies  with  that  of 
the  surrounding  populations.  Spanish  Basques  are  considerably 
longer-headed  than  French  Basques.  Algerian  and  Portuguese 
Jews  are  longer-headed  than  Polish  Jews.  Any  relation  between 
the  cephalic  index  and  intelligence  is  disproved  by  the  fact  that 
the  longest  heads  are  found  among  the  degraded  Australian 
aborigines,  and  that  the  negro  race  as  a  whole  is  more  dolicho- 
cephalic than  the  Teutonic.* 

Most  anthropologists  recognize  three  main  races  in  Europe. 
The  Nordic,  or  Scandinavian,  is  dolichocephalic,  tall  and  blond. 
The  Mediterranean  is  also  dolichocephalic,  short,  but  slender, 
and  dark.  The  Alpine,  or  Celto-.Slavic,  is  brachycephalic,  short, 
inclined  to  stockiness,  with  brown  hair  and  brown  or  grey  eyes. 
All  three  exist  in  France — the  first  in  the  North,  the  second  in 

becomes  proportionately  broader,  that  is,  more  fully  rounded,  viewed  from 
the  top  down,  this  cephalic  index  increases.  When  it  rises  above  80,  the 
head  is  called  brachycephalic;  when  it  falls  below  75,  the  term  dolicho- 
cephalic is  applied  to  it.  Indexes  between  75  and  80  are  characterized  as 
mesocephalic  (Ripley). 

•  The  index  of  the  late  Henri  Poincarfi,  philosopher  and  mathematician, 
was  over  88.  Cf.  Dr.  Toulouse,  Henri  Poincart. 


34     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIX-rH  CENTURY 

the  South,  the  third  in  the  areas  of  isolation,  Brittany,  Central 
Mountains,  Alps.  In  no  other  country  are  more  than  two  of  the 
main  races  fully  represented.* 

Some  of  the  French  of  Savoy  are  actually  the  broadest-headed 
population  in  the  world,  and  some  districts  in  Auvergne  have  as 
short  a  population  as  any  in  Europe,  the  Lapps  excepted.  But 
the  great  majority  of  the  French  are  exactly  what  the  layman 
would  expect  them  to  be:  they  offer  few  extremes,  an  immense 
diversity,  and  a  mean  average  about  equal  to  that  of  Europe  as  a 
whole.  They  are  neither  tall  nor  short,  neither  very  fair  nor 
very  dark,  neither  very  long-  nor  very  round-headed.  In  other 
words,  there  is  no  French  race  properly  so-called.  The  French, 
from  the  anthropological  point  of  view,  are  in  every  way  similar 
to  the  other  inhabitants  of  Central  and  Western  Europe. 
Environmental  and  social  differences  are  in  their  case  of  much 
more  importance  than  race.  You  can  tell  a  peasant  from  a 
mechanic,  and  both  from  a  city  clerk,  much  more  easily  than 
a  Ehinelander,  a  Bavarian,  and  a  Saxon  from  a  Champenois,  a 
Parisian,  or  an  Orleanais. 

Yet  there  is  a  French  people,  different  from  all  others.  What 
true  cosmopolitan  or  internationalist  would  dream  of  denying  the 
fact?  But  this  unity,  which  implies  neither  homogeneity  nor 
uniformity,  is  the  product  of  environment  and  history.  All 
national  groups  which  have  enjoyed  centuries  of  separate  exist- 
ence form  literally  huge  families,  ever  bound  closer  together  by 
long-continued  intermarriage  or  "  in-breeding  "  on  a  large  scale. 
There  is  no  Frenchman  who  has  not  in  his  veins  some  blood  of 
the  three,  four,  or  five  "  primary  races  "  which,  according  to 


•  Brinton  makes  a  fourth  race,  the  Kymrlc,  brachycephalic,  but  tall  and 
reddish,  and  states  that  It  also  Is  found  In  France.  Denlker  has  six  "  pri- 
mary "  races,  of  which  five  are  living1  In  France :  the  usual  Nordic,  the 
Cevenole,  which  corresponds  to  the  Alpine  or  Celto-Slavic,  a  tall  Atlanto- 
Mediterranean,  a  short  Ibero-Insular,  both  dark  and  dolichocephalic,  and 
which  are  subdivisions  of  the  orthodox  Mediterranean ;  finally  an  Adriatic 
or  Dinaric  race,  brachycephalic  but  tall,  which  other  authorities  consider 
merely  aa  a  Nordic-Alpine  hybrid.  All  these  divisions  fail  to  take  into 
account  a  curious  group  of  peasants  in  the  South -West  (Dordogne),  fairly 
tall,  dolichocephalic  but  broad-faced,  with  high  cheekbones  and  dark  hair. 
This  type,  which  recurs  also  among  the  Berbers,  has  been  identified  with 
the  prehistoric  Cro-Magnon  race,  occupying-  the  same  habitat. 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  35 

anthropology,  inhabit  France  at  the  present  day.  Thus  ethnic 
races  are  artificial,  and  none  the  less  real.  They  are  incessantly 
in  the  making,  approximating  to  a  certain  national  ideal,  or  at 
least  to  a  certain  national  average. 

But  more  potent  far  than  blood-relationship  is  the  bond  of 
unity  provided  by  tradition.  A  thousand  years  at  least  of 
common  life,  the  leadership  of  the  same  kings,  the  treasure-house 
of  the  same  literature,  the  moulding  influence  of  the  same 
customs  and  the  same  laws,  all  these,  and  not  common  descent, 
have  given  the  French  their  "  like-mindedness " — even  when 
they  are  most  fiercely  at  odds  with  one  another — their  national 
individuality.  And  even  more  than  tradition,  the  common  aspira- 
tions of  the  race  are  the  true  basis  of  its  unity.  And  these 
factors  cannot  be  gauged  by  means  of  the  callipers.  This  is 
recognized  even  by  those  writers  who  make  the  most  extravagant 
claims  for  race  in  the  physiological,  the  breeder's  acceptation 
of  the  term.  Thus  Chamberlain  finally  abandons  all  anthropo- 
logical tests,  and  holds  that  Teutonism  is  not  a  physical  fact,  but 
an  ideal.  Whoso  thinks  "  Teutonically "  is  a  Teuton,  be  his 
cephalic  index  what  it  may.  He  whose  soul  is  French  needs  no 
other  credentials.  This,  be  it  said  in  passing,  is  the  impregnable 
principle  on  which  France  bases  her  claims  to  Alsace-Lorraine. 

Whether,  as  some  would  have  it,  racial  complexity  is  a 
condition  of  culture,  is  more  than  we  can  affirm.  At  any  rate, 
in  the  case  of  France,  this  complexity  is  of  profound  significance 
for  the  future  of  the  country.  France  is  a  racial  medley,  an 
epitome  of  Europe:  if  ever  the  natural  increase  of  her  popula- 
tion should  fail  to  keep  pace  with  economic  opportunities,  she 
could  draw  almost  indefinitely  from  her  neighbours  without  losing 
her  synthetic  identity.  The  incarnation  of  French  patriotism  in 
1871  was  the  son  of  an  Italian,  and  the  roll  of  French  worthies 
in  the  nineteenth  century  contains  many  a  German  name.  So 
long  as  her  soil  is  tilled,  her  language  spoken,  and  her  ideal  kept 
alive,  the  nation  cannot  die. 

(d)  Psychology  of  the  French  People. 

Thus  our  problem,  the  definition  of  the  French  people,  can  be 
solved  neither  by  linguistics,  ethnography,  nor  anthropology,  but 


36     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

by  collective  psychology.  This  kind  of  study,  of  which  Taine, 
Boutmy,  Fouillee,  Lebon,  Demolins,  Bodley,  Brownell,  Barrett 
Wendell  have  left  us  brilliant  or  popular  models,  is  as  dangerous 
as  it  is  attractive.  The  collective  mind,  if  it  exist  at  all,  is  so 
many-sided  and  unstable  that  no  delineation  can  ever  be  more 
than  a  working  hypothesis  of  very  doubtful  and  provisional  value. 
Where  is  the  dreamy,  unworldly,  metaphysical  and  sentimental 
Germany  of  yester-year?  Where  the  solid,  matter-of-fact,  law- 
abiding,  tradition-loving,  antisocialistic  England  so  dear  to 
bourgeois  economists  and  politicians  of  the  last  generation? 
Where  is  the  France  whose  radical  unfitness  in  the  colonial  field 
was  a  by-word  a  few  short  years  ago?  Where  is  the  un- 
changing Chinese?  We  shall  have  to  challenge  many  such 
generalizations  in  the  course  of  this  chapter  and  of  this  book. 

We  do  not  profess  to  know  whether  there  is  any  ultimate 
justification  for  "  national  psychology."  But  there  is  at  least 
one  tangible  element  in  it:  the  image  of  a  people  in  their  own 
minds  and  in  the  minds  of  their  neighbours  is  one  of  the  ideal 
forces  which  help  frame  their  destiny. 

The  traits  of  the  French  character  on  which  most  observers, 
French  as  well  as  foreign,  seem  to  agree,  can  be  summarily 
analysed  as  follows: 

Most  obvious  perhaps  is  a  certain  cheerfulness,  not  exuberant 
and  spasmodic,  but  gentle  and  suffused  through  the  daily  routine 
of  life.  It  neither  implies  nor  excludes  true  happiness  and 
genuine  good-nature.  There  is  no  mixture  of  sentiment  in  it, 
and  it  has  a  decided  bend  towards  mockery.  In  all  these 
respects  it  is  different  from  Italian  joyousness,  English  good- 
humour  or  German  Gemuthlichkeit.  Most  of  all  does  it  differ 
from  the  outbursts  of  sheer  animal  spirits  which  alternate  in  the 
Anglo-Saxons  with  long  stretches  of  intense  earnestness.  The 
French  cannot  indulge  in  rollicking  nonsense,  but  they  cannot 
repress  a  smile  in  the  midst  of  the  most  serious  discussion.  This 
tendency,  combined  with  common  sense,  is  the  basis  of  French 
wit.  Applied  to  spiritual  problems  it  may  be  called  Voltairian- 
ism ;  in  moral  questions  it  often  leads  to  "  Gallic  levity "  or 
bantering  cynicism.  Lafontaine,  Voltaire,  and  to  a  certain 
extent  Kenan,  are  its  highest  representatives  in  literature. 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  87 

while  Gavroche,  the  heroic  gamin,  may  be  taken  as  its  clearest 
symbol. 

A  second  trait,  no  less  apparent,  is  a  nervous  temperament, 
high-strung,  excitable,  expansive  and  explosive,  quickly  moved 
to  enthusiasm  and  to  despair.  This  was  ascribed  of  old  to  their 
Gallic  ancestors,  and  it  remains  true  in  the  nineteenth  century. 
The  constant  fermentation  of  the  Parisian  mind,  the  fickleness 
of  'Parisian  fashion,  the  instability  of  political  regimes  until  1870 
and  of  Ministries  after  that  date,  are  offered  as  instances  of  this 
tendency. 

Before  proceeding  with  our  analysis,  let  us  note  that  these 
two  traits  are  correlated:  the  first  acts  as  a  corrective  to  the 
second.  Excitable  as  they  are,  the  French  need  the  check  of 
their  light-hearted  scepticism.  Whatever  they  take  seriously 
they  take  tragically.  Songs  and  jests,  after  all,  are  better 
than  civil  wars  and  persecutions. 

But  when  in  the  preceding  paragraphs  we  used  the  word 
"  French,"  we  were  conscious  of  its  inadequacy.  These  two 
traits,  gaiety  and  excitability,  are  not  characteristic  of  France 
as  a  whole,  but  of  certain  parts  only — Paris  and  the  South. 
The  other  provinces  are  earnest,  persevering,  conservative, 
with  a  tendency  to  stolid  gravity  and  even  to  melancholy. 
Whoever  is  acquainted  with  French  peasants  will  never  hear 
without  a  smile  the  usual  talk  about  French  liveliness.  But 
Paris  obscures  the  rest  of  the  country,  except  the  irrepress- 
ible South.  Some  spectacular  events  in  French  history,  some 
minor  characteristics  of  French  literature,  may  be  explained  by 
these  traits,  but  they  hardly  affect  the  main  tenor  of  French 
life.  France  has  known  a  dozen  regimes  within  eighty  years: 
this  was  a  crisis  in  the  life  of  the  nation,  similar  to  the  one 
England  went  through  in  the  seventeenth  century.  But  for 
eight  hundred  years  the  French  had  remained  obstinately 
loyal  to  the  Capetian  dynasty.  Napoleon  restored  much  of 
the  ancient  regime  under  different  names,  and  France,  after  a 
hundred"  years,  has  hardly  changed  anything  in  the  adminis- 
trative institutions  he  created.  Ministerial  instability  is  more 
apparent  than  real:  in  most  cases,  a  change  of  government 
means  only  a  reshuffling  of  the  old  pack.  Each  general 


38     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

election  for  the  last  forty  years  has  shown  the  steadiness  of 
the  electorate,  moderate  as  a  whole,  slowly  moving  towards  the 
Radical  Left,  without  any  of  those  sudden  "  swings  of  the  pen- 
dulum "  and  "  landslides  "  so  frequent  in  British  and  American 
politics. 

In  the  same  way,  the  so-called  Gallic  or  Parisian  strain  in 
French  literature,  with  its  easy  wit  and  smiling  scepticism,  is  but 
one  of  the  elements  of  French  thought — the  most  unique, 
perhaps,  but  by  no  means  the  most  important.  It  may  boast, 
with  the  unknown  authors  of  Renart,  the  fabliaux  and  farces  of 
the  Middle  Ages,  of  Eabelais,  Montaigne,  Lafontaine,  Moliere, 
Voltaire,  Kenan,  Anatole  France — in  some  of  their  aspects. 
But  the  more  numerous  and  the  greater  masterpieces  at  all 
epochs  are  of  a  more  earnest  nature.  The  medieval  epic,  the 
poetry  of  the  Renaissance,  the  drama  and  Christian  philosophy 
of  the  seventeenth  century,  Jean-Jacques  and  Buffon  in  the 
eighteenth,  the  Romanticists  and  the  Realists  in  the  nineteenth 
— where  is  the  Gallic  levity  of  all  these? — Calvin,  Pascal,  and 
Alfred  de  Vigny  are  no  less  French  than  Meilhac  and  Halevy. 
The  two  tendencies  coexist  and  are  equally  French.  Their 
blending — gravity  relieved  by  a  smile — gives  a  unique  charm  to 
the  conversation  of  many  French  priests  and  scholars.* 

A  third  characteristic  of  the  French  is  their  sociability.  By 
this  we  do  not  mean  mere  good-fellowship,  but  the  predominance 
of  the  social  over  the  individual  elements  in  every  form  of  human 
activity — and,  as  a  consequence,  the  predominance  of  the  formal 
over  the  spontaneous.  We  find  this  in  society  life,  in  which 
French  tact,  diplomacy,  savoir-vivre  and  etiquette  have  become 
so  many  by-words.  The  ransom  for  these  admirable  qualities  is 
a  propensity  to  circuitous  conventionalities,  a  certain  lack  of 
bluntness  which  less  polite  people  are  apt  to  misunderstand.  In 
art,  the  same  turn  of  mind  leads  to  the  worship  of  taste  and 
style,  in  which  the  French  are  passed  masters;  it  may  also  lead 
to  superstitious  reverence  for  set  rules  and  canons,  to  pseudo- 

•  Cf.  Kenan's  Souvenirs  d'Enfance  et  de  Jeunesae,  Anatole  France's  Hia- 
toire  Contemporaine.  The  peculiar  cheerfulness  and  excitability  of  the 
French  have  not  seldom  been  ascribed  to  the  long-continued  drinking  of 
light  wines. 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  39 

classicism  and  all  its  evils.  In  the  moral  world,  the  same  ten- 
dency is  revealed  in  the  potency  of  social  sanctions — honorific 
rewards,  popularity,  applause,  infamy,  ridicule.  Honour  is  the 
Frenchman's  conscience.  From  the  injustice  of  men  he  would 
appeal,  not  to  the  everlasting  God  revealed  in  his  soul,  but  to 
posterity;  that  is  to  say,  to  public  opinion  in  the  future. 

In  this  supremacy  of  the  collective  mind  we  cannot  fail  to 
recognize  a  victory  of  will  over  instinct.  Heavy  are  the  losses 
that  such  a  triumph  entails.  We  may  doubt  whether  it  is 
worth  while.  Yet  the  greatest  causes  the  world  is  fighting  for, 
social  justice  and  universal  peace,  cannot  be  won  except  through 
such  a  curbing  of  primitive  individual  instincts.  The  French 
ideal,  artificial  though  it  be,  means  a  striving  from  chaos  to 
order,  from  barbarism  to  civilization. 

The  fourth  cardinal  feature  of  the  French  mind  we  might  call 
"  intellectualism."  The  French  are  not  pre-eminently  mystical, 
sentimental,  or  imaginative,  and  they  yield  the  palm  of  practical 
sense  to  the  "  Anglo-Saxons."  Their  domain  is  logical  thought. 
This  is  intimately  connected  with  the  preceding  characteristic, 
sociability.  Since  the  individual  is  subordinated  to  the  collec- 
tivity, "  common  sense,"  or  conformity  with  the  general  experi- 
ence and  judgment  of  the  race,  is  held  supreme.  "  Common 
sense  "  is  but  the  popular  name  for  "  reason,"  still  the  goddess 
of  many  a  French  mind.  The  French  are  passionate  reasoners 
and  rationalists.  They  love  abstract  ideas  with  an  intensity 
which  their  neighbours  can  hardly  realize.  Mysticism,  sentiment, 
imagination,  unchecked  by  reason,  seem  to  them  individualistic, 
that  is  to  say,  erratic  and  unruly.  Even  facts  are  despised  as 
disorderly  until  they  have  been  reduced  to  logical  laws.  The 
trim  avenues  of  Versailles,  the  historical  theorems  or  the  literary 
syllogisms  of  Taine,  are  evidences  of  this  turn  of  mind. 

The  love  of  the  French  for  abstract  ideas  is  one  of  their 
ennobling  features.  It  imparted  to  their  revolutions,  and  even 
to  individual  cases  like  the  Dreyfus  affair,  a  universal  significance. 
In  personal  matters  the  French  may  be  tempted  to  veil  the 
truth  for  the  sake  of  politeness:  but  on  questions  of  principles 
their  intellectual  sincerity  is  uncompromising.  They  are  fear- 
lessly honest  thinkers,  and  so  averse  to  comfortable  self-delusion 


40     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

that  they  take  a  sort  of  bitter  pride  and  pleasure  in  believing 
the  worst:  hence  the  destructive,  pessimistic,  almost  cynical 
strain  in  their  literature.  This  is  not  a  thing  of  yesterday: 
Becque  and  Zola  were  the  legitimate  heirs  of  Lesage,  Moliere, 
and  La  Rochefoucauld. 

Each  dominant  trait  in  an  individual  or  in  a  nation  is  accom- 
panied by  its  reverse  and  complement,  which  is  a  reaction  or  a 
protest  against  it.  The  total  picture  is  the  result  of  these 
contrasts.  Thus  French  cheerfulness  has  always  had  a  back- 
ground of  pessimism  and  misanthropy.  The  French  love  of 
change  is  ever  fighting  against  the  French  love  of  routine. 
French  formalism  is  paid  for  by  outbursts  of  licence  whenever 
outward  checks  are  removed.  French  indulgence  for  polite 
fictions  is  redeemed  by  intellectual  courage  and  candour  in 
matters  of  principles,  and  the  fierce  radicalism  of  the  French 
mind  is  corrected  by  its  sensitiveness  to  ridicule. 

The  sociability  and  logicalness  of  the  French  are  not  "  racial " 
traits,  since  there  is  no  French  race.  They  are  not  found  fully 
developed  in  remote  districts  or  among  the  lowest  strata.  It  is 
in  urban  centres,  in  Paris  especially,  that  we  find  them  full 
blown,  and  most  of  all  perhaps  among  foreigners  won  over  to 
French  ideas — Max  Nordau,  Novicow,  Jean  Finot.  These 
traits  are  not  racy  of  the  soil ;  they  are  the  product  of  education — 
a  collective  education  continued  for  two  thousand  years.  But 
they  have  penetrated  very  deep.  France  has  an  immense 
middle  class,  in  conscious  touch  with  the  life  of  the  country. 
And  these  traits  have  passed  into  the  language,  which  has  thus 
become  a  school  of  urbanity,  logic,  and  abstraction,  so  that  it  is 
not  possible  for  a  young  peasant  to  be  taught  standard  French 
without  receiving  indirectly  some  of  the  spirit  of  Moliere  and 
Voltaire. 

These  essential  qualities  are  the  natural  result  of  France's 
heterogeneity.  They  are  the  qualities  indispensable  to  smooth 
intercourse  among  foreigners.  The  many  peoples,  the  several 
races  which  inhabit  France  have  little  in  common,  except  what 
is  common  to  all  men.  In  sentiment  and  imagination  they 
differ  so  radically  that  they  cannot  understand  one  another: 
abstract  reason  is  the  one  universal  bond  of  union.  At  the 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  41 

same  time,  and  this  is  the  paradox,  the  miracle  of  French  history, 
these  heterogeneous  and  often  warring  elements  want  to  remain 
united:  that  is  why  everything  that  might  lead  to  disruption  is 
immediately  outlawed.  Woe  to  minorities,  woe  to  individuali- 
ties !  In  a  country  where  the  indispensable  degree  of  like- 
mindedness  is  maintained  only  by  constant  exertion  of  will- 
power, nonconformity,  dissent,  is  the  worst  social  sin. 

But  these  traits  are  merely  collective,  superimposed.  Origi- 
nality of  thought,  intensity  of  feelings,  power  of  imagination, 
may  be  veiled  under  conventionalities  and  abstractions:  they 
are  not  destroyed.  An  accomplished  American  lady  told  the 
author  one  day  that  all  the  tragedies  of  Eacine  seemed  to  her 
identical:  the  smooth  and  pompous  verse  prevented  her  from 
discerning  the  depth  and  infinite  variety  of  passion  depicted  in 
these  masterpieces.  As  one  becomes  better  acquainted  with 
Eacine's  technique,  it  recedes  into  the  background,  and  one 
realizes  that  Eacine  is  closer  akin  to  Shakespeare  than  to 
Campistron.  In  the  same  way,  under  the  polished  veneer  of 
French  society  and  the  attractive  generality  of  French  thought, 
we  should  remember  that  there  are  men  and  women  with  the 
same  feelings  as  their  brothers  and  sisters  all  the  world  over. 
The  part  of  "  collective  psychology "  is  not  so  much  to  offer 
positive  explanations  as  to  remove  causes  of  misapprehension. 


(e)  Race  from  the  Eugenic  Point  of  View. 

There  is  still  another  sense  of  the  word  "  race  " :  i.e.,  the  "  breed  "  or 
"  stock  "  considered  from  the  point  of  view  of  its  physical  fitness.  The 
alleged  "  racial  decay  "  of  the  French  as  well  as  their  moral  degeneration 
was  freely  and  frequently  discussed  some  fifteen  or  twenty  years  ago.  We 
shall  study  in  a  later  chapter  the  curious  fit  of  pessimism  and  self-depre- 
ciation which  was  the  basis  of  much  of  this  talk,  as  well  as  the  herald  of  a 
vigorous  revival.  France  suffers  from  all  the  ills  of  the  modern  world : 
alcoholism,  tuberculosis,  venereal  diseases,  and  nervousness.  But  two  facts 
were  generally  put  forward  as  irrefutable  evidence  of  this  physical  decay : 
the  lowering  of  the  minimum  height  required  of  French  recruits  and  the 
steady  decrease  of  the  birth-rate.  The  first  fact,  however,  implies  no 
diminution  in  the  average  height  of  conscripts:  it  simply  means  that 
France,  wishing  not  to  fall  too  far  behind  Germany  in  military  strength, 
whilst  her  population  is  increasing  at  a  vastly  slower  rate,  was  obliged  to 
call  in  an  ever  greater  portion  of  her  young-  manhood.  Should  France  re- 
duce her  army  to  the  same  ratio  of  the  total  population  as  in  Germany,  she 


42     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXra  CENTURY 

could  immediately  raise  the  required  minimum.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the 
average  stature  of  the  French,  which  as  far  as  we  know  had  remained  the 
same  throughout  the  twenty  centuries  of  their  history,  is  now  decidedly  on 
the  increase,  as  the  yearly  reports  of  the  Conscription  Committees  will 
show.  And  the  vitality  of  individuals  is  also  improving  in  the  country  as 
a  whole.  There  are  local  areas  of  degeneration,  the  result  of  alcoholism 
(parts  of  Normandy)  or  selective  emigration  (parts  of  Auvergne).  But 
the  morbidity  and  the  death-rate  are  lower  than  they  ever  were. 

The  decline  of  the  birth-rate,  which  began,  we  are  told,  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  has  now  become  such  a  regular  and  universal  phenomenon  among 
the  most  civilized  nations  that  the  French  are  no  longer  singled  out  as  an 
awful  example.  New  England  and  Australia  are  as  infertile  as  France. 
The  Germans  are  as  inferior  in  this  respect  to  the  Poles,  whom  they 
despise,  as  they  are  superior  to  the  French.  This  decline  seems  to  be  in- 
separable from  our  stage  of  civilization,  for  causes  which  cannot  fully  be 
discussed  in  this  place.  Suffice  it  to  say  (1)  that  the  population  of  France 
is  still  increasing,  albeit  slowly :  the  deficit  of  certain  years  has  always 
been  more  than  made  up  within  the  quinquennial  period  between  two 
censuses ;  ( 2 )  that  there  seems  to  be  no  room  for  a  vast  and  rapid  increase 
in  population,  on  account  of  the  fairly  high  standard  of  living  combined 
with  the  comparative  scantiness  of  natural  resources  (undeveloped  lands, 
coal,  and  metals).  This  is  made  evident  by  the  fact  that  thousands  of  Cen- 
tral Europeans  cross  France  every  year  without  stopping  and  proceed  to 
America. 


§  4.  THE  TRADITION:  ANCIENT  REGIME  AND  REVOLUTION. 

1.  Dramatic  character  of  French  history — Real  continuity. 

2.  France    grew    with    the    Capetian    dynasty — Character    of    its 
power:  autocratic  but  national — Eighteenth  century:  the  King  cap- 
tured by  the  nobles — Progress  of  radical  ideas,  failure  of  reforms, 
sharp  reaction  at  the  close  of  the  regime. 

3.  The  Revolution  (a)  completes  the  work  of  the  Capetians;   (ft) 
transfers   sovereignty   from   the   King,   theoretically   to   the   people, 
practically  to  the  Third  Estate    (bourgeoisie)  ;    (c)   transfers  vast 
amount  of  landed  property  from  clergy  and  nobility  to  bourgeoisie 
and  peasantry;   (d)  temporizes  and  compromises  more  than  is  usu- 
ally thought. 

4.  Did  France  need  a  "saviour"  in  1799? — Conditions  not  desper- 
ate— Bourgeoisie  wanted  to  make  its  conquests  secure — "  Close  the 
era  of  revolutions  " — The  army  as  final  arbiter. 


The  political  history  of  modern  France  is  intensely  dramatic. 
Within  less  than  a  century  (1789-1870)  the  country  has  tried 
eleven  regimes.  None,  except  the  present  Republic,  has  sur- 
vived the  generation  of  its  founders,  and  every  one,  even  the 
most  powerful  at  the  heyday  of  its  splendour,  felt  itself 
threatened  by  irreconcilable  opposition  and  at  the  mercy  of 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  43 

an  incident.  Each  revolution  was  no  mere  pronunciamiento, 
which  brings  in  only  a  new  personnel  and  at  most  a  new  vocabu- 
lary: each  attempted  to  introduce  new  institutions,  new  prin- 
ciples, and  a  different  ideal.  The  formidable  crisis  of  1789-94 
left  France  rent  in  twain,  and  the  two  nations  have  lived  ever 
since  in  a  state  of  open  or  latent  warfare. 

One  part  of  France  still  holds  as  a  dogma  that  the  country 
was  born  anew  during  the  fateful  years  of  the  Eevolution  and 
the  Empire.  The  old  order,  based  on  prejudice  and  privilege, 
passed  away,  and  from  its  ruins  there  sprang  the  new  order, 
based  on  Reason  and  Justice.  This  is  the  democratic  view, 
singularly  attractive  in  its  broad  optimism  and  its  dramatic 
simplicity:  it  is  the  orthodox  doctrine  taught  in  State  schools 
and  found  at  its  best  in  Michelet's  glowing  pages. 

For  another  set  of  Frenchmen — the  conservatives,  the  pessi- 
mists, the  disciples  of  Rivarol  and  Taine,  of  Burke  and  Carlyle,* 
the  body  politic  is  not  a  spontaneous,  still  less  a  voluntary, 
aggregation,  which  can  be  dissolved  and  reformed  at  will.  It  is 
at  the  same  time  anti-natural  and  organic:  whilst  it  holds  in 
check  the  evil,  or  at  least  the  anti-social  tendencies  of  natural 
man,  it  is  the  fruit  of  immemorial  and  unconscious  efforts,  the 
wonderful  and  fragile  growth  of  centuries.  Any  rationalistic 
tampering  with  its  development  is  bound  to  end  in  disaster. 
Authority,  so  painfully  reared,  collapses  into  chaos.  The  wolf 
in  man — or,  as  Taine  would  say,  the  gorilla — is  let  loose. 
Civilization  itself  would  be  engulfed  were  it  not  rescued — but  at 
what  cost! — by  the  strong  arm  of  a  despot.  These  men  believe 
in  the  gospel  of  authority  and  tradition.  They  hold  fast  to  the 
institutions  which  have  survived  the  great  upheaval:  the 
Fatherland,  the  Church,  and  Property.  The  others  would 
carry  the  "immortal  principles"  of  liberty,  equality,  and 
fraternity  to  their  logical  ends;  and  this  not  merely  in  the 
political  field,  but  in  the  domains  of  international  relations, 
economics,  and  religion  as  well.  Each  party  is  to  the  other 
a  power  of  Darkness,  and  no  reconciliation  between  the  two  is 
conceivable. 

•  The  earliest  and  clearest  presentation  of  this  point  of  view  can  be  found 
in  Rivarol's  Journal  PoUtique  National,  August  2,  1789. 


44     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

Yet  it  would  be  an  error  to  consider  this  conflict  as  peculiar 
to  France:  it  is  but  an  extreme  case  of  the  antinomy  between 
conservation  and  progress  which  is  found  all  the  world  over. 
The  logical  turn  of  mind  of  the  French,  their  aversion  to  com- 
promise when  principles  are  involved,  have  led  both  parties  to 
the  adoption  of  definite,  consistent,  and  radical  doctrines.  The 
Eevolution  polarized,  as  it  were,  the  opposing  elements  within 
the  nation.  But  this  absolute  opposition  is  more  theoretical 
than  real.  The  vast  majority  of  the  people  are  conservative 
without  fanaticism.  In  many  of  the  most  advanced  thinkers 
radicalism  is  tempered  by  Parisian  scepticism  and  irony.  The 
permanent  and  ineluctable  necessities  of  life  have  never  allowed 
principles  to  be  carried  to  their  extreme  consequences:  even  the 
Convention  temporized  and  compromised.  If  we  look  below  the 
stormy  surface  of  French  political  life,  we  find  a  deep,  slow, 
and  steady  stream  unaffected  by  the  winds  above.  However 
sudden  and  tragic  French  revolutions  in  the  nineteenth  century 
may  have  been,  it  remains  a  question  whether  in  point  of  actual 
performance  any  of  them  meant  much  more  than  an  average 
general  election  in  Great  Britain.  The  great  Eevolution  itself, 
that  "  titanic  birth  of  a  new  world,"  is  less  of  a  break  in  French 
traditions  than  is  commonly  believed.  Early  in  the  eighteenth 
century,  Saint-Simon  was  conscious  of  the  levelling,  anti-feudal- 
istic,  and  bourgeois  trend  of  the  Bourbon  monarchy.  Chateau- 
briand was  justified  in  his  paradox  that  "  the  Revolution  was 
made  long  before  it  broke  out."  De  Tocqueville  and  Albert 
.Sorel  have  shown  conclusively  that  the  theories  and  methods 
of  the  ancient  regime  were  continued  almost  unaltered  under 
the  new,  as  well  in  home  affairs  as  in  diplomacy.  In  spite  of 
appearances,  French  history  is  continuous.  The  Monarchy  of 
Louis  XIV,  the  Empire  of  Napoleon,  the  Republic  of  Gambetta, 
are  parts  of  the  same  tradition.  Whoever  ignores  or  despises 
the  past  cannot  fully  understand  the  present. 

France  was  moulded,  if  not  actually  made,  by  the  long  line 
of  her  Capetian  kings.  None  of  them  was  a  genius,  and  only 
one  was  a  saint.  Yet,  through  eight  centuries,  they  managed 
to  round  out  their  domain  and  establish  their  authority.  The 
country  grew  in  extent  and  in  self-consciousness  with  the  power 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  4,5 

of  her  rulers.  In  1789  their  work  was  almost  complete.  The 
boundaries  of  France  reached  almost  everywhere  the  limits  of  the 
French  speech.  The  vast  process  of  consolidation,  unification, 
organization,  which  was  to  turn  feudal  chaos  into  the  modern 
State,  had  been  hastened  by  Eichelieu  and  Louis  XIV.  No 
privilege  with  any  political  significance  was  suffered  to  exist. 
The  King  was  no  longer  merely  the  first  of  the  nobles — primus 
inter  pares.  He  was  the  Lord's  anointed,  endowed  with 
miraculous  powers,  and  the  etiquette  of  his  Court  was  almost 
a  ritual.  Yet  he  was  not  an  Oriental  despot,  but  rather  the 
heir  of  the  Roman  Emperor — the  State  personified,  the  embodi- 
ment of  law.  All  authority  was  vested  in  his  officials,  appointed 
by  him,  responsible  to  him,  and  whom  he  selected  freely  from 
the  lower  nobility  and  the  bourgeoisie.  Thus  the  ancient  regime 
was  an  autocracy  indeed :  the  independence  and  traditions 
of  the  judiciary  barely  tempered  that  absolute  character.  But 
it  was  an  autocracy  guided  by  and  exercised  through  democratic 
elements.  It  served  the  interests  of  the  people  at  large,  and 
was  directed  against  all  privileges  and  intermediate  authorities. 
It  was,  in  fact,  a  levelling,  simplifying,  rationalizing  agency.  So 
long  as  the  King  remained  on  the  whole  true  to  this  national 
character  of  his  power,  the  French  were  obstinately  loyal  to 
his  dynasty.  Individual  faults  were  condoned  with  surprising 
indulgence.  And  even  when  decades  of  war,  waste,  and  open 
profligacy  had  ruined  affection  and  respect,  the  great  mass  of  the 
people,  while  despising  Louis  the  Great  and  hating  Louis 
the  Well-Beloved,  still  pinned  their  faith  to  the  Bourbon 
monarchy. 

But  throughout  the  eighteenth  century  the  regime  was 
untrue  to  its  inner  principle.  Louis  XIV  had  effectually  ruined 
the  power  of  the  nobility,  and  Versailles  was  merely  a  place 
of  gorgeous  servitude:  the  King,  surrounded  by  the  host  of  his 
captives,  became  their  prisoner  in  his  turn.  There  was  a 
radical  difference  between  the  monarchy  of  Henry  IV,  and  even 
of  Louis  JQV  when  Colbert  was  in  office,  and  that  of  Louis  XV, 
the  King  of  the  nobles,  absolutely  out  of  touch  with  his  people. 
Louis  XVI,  hailed  as  a  new  Henry  IV,  was  too  weak  to 
resume  the  true  tradition  of  hig  race.  Privileges  were  retained 


46     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

whilst  the  services  they  once  corresponded  to  had  long  ceased 
to  be  performed :  meaningless,  burdensome,  vexatious,  they 
became  intolerable  with  the  progress  of  radical  ideas  favoured 
by  the  nobles  themselves.  The  aristocracy  applauded  Voltaire, 
Rousseau,  Diderot,  and  even  the  direct  and  destructive  attack 
of  Figaro's  monologue:  they  lionized  Franklin  and  were  filled 
with  genuine  enthusiasm  for  American  liberty;  but  at  the 
same  time  a  sharp  reaction  perpetuated  injustice,  made  it 
more  hopeless.  At  the  close  of  the  ancient  regime,  Chevert, 
Catinat,  Fabert,  could  not  have  become  generals  or  marshals,* 
Bossuet,  Massillon,  Flechier  could  not  have  become  bishops,  t 
"Never  were  more  manorial  registers  made  (for  the  exaction 
of  feudal  dues)  than  after  1786;  feudal  taxes  were  heavier 
than  they  had  ever  been  since  the  sixteenth  century."  $•  The 
result  was  inevitable:  the  financial  straits  of  the  government, 
driven  to  bankruptcy  by  its  extravagance  and  maladministra- 
tion, provided  the  opportunity  for  sweeping  reforms.  In  three 
months  (May  5  to  August  4,  1789),  with  comparatively  little 
bloodshed  and  amidst  universal  rejoicings,  the  ancient  regime 
was  destroyed. 

But  the  Constituent  Assembly  was  simply  crowning,  in  a 
few  weeks,  the  patient  work  of  the  Capetian  line.  The 
suppression  of  all  surviving  privileges,  whether  they  belonged 
to  a  caste,  an  order,  a  corporation,  or  a  province ;  equality  before 
the  law;  uniformization  of  territorial  divisions,  jurisdictions, 
weights  and  coinage,  taxes  and  local  government — all  these 
measures,  hasty  though  they  were,  and  illiberal  at  times  under 
their  apparent  logic,  would  have  secured  the  hearty  endorse- 
ment of  Francis  I  and  Richelieu.  Even  the  so-called  Civil 
Constitution  of  the  Clergy,  the  stumbling-block  of  the  Revolution, 
was  strictly  in  accordance  with  the  Gallican  policy  of  the 
French  kings,  summed  up  by  Bossuet  in  the  Declaration  of 
1682.  That  there  should  be  no  intermediate  powers  or 


•  Edict  of  Saint-Germain  on  the  status  of  officers,  1781. 

t  Cf.  Aime  Cheret.  La  Chute  de  I'Ancien  Regime. 

t  Ph.  Sagnac,  "  L»a  Propriety  Ponclere  et  les  Paysans,"  in  L'CEuvre  80- 
ciale  de  la  Revolution  (p.  229);  also  J.  Loutchisky,  L'Etat  dea  Classes 
Agricoles  en  France  d  la  veille  de  la  Revolution. 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  47 

influences  between  the  individual  subject  and  his  sovereign 
was  the  guiding  principle  of  autocracy  as  it  was  that  of  the 
Eousseauists.  Although  they  had  "  learnt  nothing  and  for- 
gotten nothing,"  the  restored  Bourbons,  in  1815,  were  only 
too  glad  to  preserve  many  of  the  administrative  reforms  of  the 
Eevolution. 

Yet  it  is  obvious  that  the  Eevolution  was  no  mere  return 
to  the  national  tradition  of  the  old  kings.  The  weakening 
of  that  very  notion  of  tradition,  the  substitution  for  it  of 
abstract  "  reason,"  were  indeed  among  the  chief  characteristics 
of  the  movement.  And  although  the  "  reason  "  of  eighteenth- 
century  Frenchmen  was  bound  to  move  along  certain  lines 
predetermined  by  their  history,  the  difference  between  the 
two  principles  soon  became  evident.  The  authority  of  the 
"sovereign"  remained  as  absolute  as  ever,  but  sovereignty 
was  transferred  from  the  prince  to  the  nation.  Election  took 
everywhere  the  place  of  heredity  or  arbitrary  choice,  and  was 
soon  applied  even  to  the  army  and  to  the  clergy.  This  meant 
nothing  less  than  the  recasting  of  a  world.  By  ruining  the 
concept  of  traditional  authority  in  matters  political,  the 
Eevolutionists,  disciples  of  the  Philosophers,  shook  the  basis 
of  historical  religion  as  well,  and  henceforth  "abuses"  and 
"  superstition  "  were  denounced  in  the  same  breath.  Although 
in  1792-93  the  terms  "  democrat "  and  "  patriot "  were  synony- 
mous, the  historical  Fatherland,  with  its  mystic  appeal  to  sacrifice, 
would  not  for  ever  stand  in  the  light  of  modern  rationalism. 
The  universal  Eepublic  was  already  an  ideal  of  the  Eevolution. 
Finally,  the  condemnation  of  privileges  and  heredity  in  the 
political  State,  the  wholesale  confiscation  of  long-established 
property  as  a  measure  of  national  expediency,  pointed  to  a 
more  radical  revolution  in  the  economic  and  social  field. 

This  danger  did  not  appear  for  many  decades:  the  con- 
spiracy of  Babceuf  can  hardly  be  called  the  dawn  of  modern 
socialism.  Private  property  was  one  of  the  "  sacred  rights " 
recognized  by  the  Declaration,  and  death  was  later  decreed 
against  whoever  should  dare  to  propose  an  "  agrarian  law."  * 
The  sale  of  "  national  property,"  composed  of  the  confiscated 
*  A  souvenir  of  the  Gracchi. 


48     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

domains  of  the  clergy  and  of  emigrating  nobles,  changed  the 
course  of  the  Revolution,  and  by  some  writers  is  held  to  be 
the  whole  of  the  Revolution.  The  most  numerous  and  most 
conservative  classes,  the  peasantry  and  the  lower  bourgeoisie, 
had  at  last  free  access  to  the  ownership  of  land,  their  im- 
memorial dream.  This  immense  redistribution  of  property  by 
the  collectivity  was  in  deep  agreement  with  the  basic  principles 
of  the  Revolution,  but  in  flat  contradiction  to  the  prejudices 
and  professed  beliefs  of  the  very  men  who  voted  it.  It  was 
an  emergency  measure,  founded  on  the  old  raison  d'etat — 
salus  populi.  Although  it  was  by  its  very  nature  an  expedient, 
an  exception,  it  overshadowed  for  a  generation  all  the  other 
aspects  of  the  movement.  Although  it  was  practically  an 
act  of  socialism,  it  created  that  most  powerful  antisocialistic 
interest,  an  innumerable  army  of  small  landed  proprietors. 

In  thus  substituting  one  dogma  for  another,  the  sove- 
reignty of  the  people  for  the  right  of  divinely  ordained  rulers, 
the  authority  of  reason  for  that  of  tradition,  there  is  no  doubt 
that  the  Revolution  abandoned  the  safe  ground  of  experience 
and  indulged  in  abstract  theorizing.  "  Perish  the  Colonies 
rather  than  a  principle ! " :  this  oft-quoted  phrase  is  sup- 
posed to  sum  up  the  shallow  rationalism  of  the  Jacobins, 
fanatically  blind  to  living  realities.  Yet  this  is  but  one  face 
of  the  truth.  Historians  with  a  systematic  turn  of  mind, 
like  Taine,  fail  to  see  the  sane,  cautious,  solid  side  of  the 
great  Assemblies.  There  is  much  more  "  opportunism  "  in  the 
Revolution  than  some  of  its  critics  would  have  us  believe. 
Until  the  10th  of  August,  1792,  the  constitutional  monarchy  of 
Louis  XVI  was  an  attempted  compromise  between  tradition  and 
principle.  Not  only  was  hereditary  monarchy  retained,  but 
manhood  suffrage  was  not  introduced,  and  the  provisions  of  the 
Constitution  of  1791  in  this  respect  were  less  liberal  than 
the  last  concessions  of  the  old  regime  in  1788.  After 
Thermidor  9,  1794,  there  was  a  sharp  reaction  against 
intolerant  Jacobinism;  the  Thermidorian  Convention  and  the 
Directoire  were  bourgeois  regimes,  trimming  their  sails  pretty 
close  to  the  wind.  But  even  during  the  height  of  the  crisis 
the  Montagnards  and  the  Terrorists  themselves  were  prompt  to 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  49 

recognize  the  limit  of  immediate  applicability  of  their  principles. 
No  sufficient  attention  is  generally  given  to  the  fact  that  two 
at  least  of  the  most  important,  wisest,  and  most  liberal  measures 
of  the  Eevolution  were  passed  under  the  rule  of  the  Jacobins, 
whom  we  were  taught  to  consider  as  raving  fanatics.  It  was 
Bouquier,  a  prominent  member  of  the  Club,  the  friend  and 
mouthpiece  of  Bobespierre,  who  induced  the  Convention  to 
reject  the  theoretical  and  unworkable  plans  of  public 
education  proposed  by  Eomme  and  Lepeletier  de  Saint- 
Fargeau:  his  own  system  established  absolute  liberty  for  any 
one  to  open  a  school,  under  the  supervision  of  local  voluntary 
associations.  Not  even  priests  or  nobles  were  debarred  from  that 
right,  and  subsidies  were  to  be  given  to  all  institutions,  in 
proportion  to  the  number  of  their  scholars.  By  the  decrees 
of  September  18,  1794,  February  21  and  May  30,  1795,  the 
Convention,  tired  of  persecutions,  schisms,  and  newfangled 
cults,  decreed  the  absolute  separation  of  Church  and  State. 
This  was  under  the  Thermidorian  reaction :  but  before  the 
downfall  of  Eobespierre,  and  under  his  inspiration,  a  halt  had 
been  called  to  religious  persecution.* 

Thus  the  Eevolution  as  an  "  indivisible  block  "  is  a  legend, 
be  it  said  with  due  respect  for  the  veteran  statesman  who  made 
that  catchword  famous,  t  We  can  distinguish  at  least  four 
main  elements:  continuation  of  the  national  or  Capetian 
tradition ;  application  of  philosophical  principles ;  vast  transfer  of 
property  due  to  the  stress  of  circumstances ;  and,  in  every  detail 
of  administration  as  well  as  in  many  capital  decisions,  a  remark- 
able willingness  to  listen  to  experience  and  to  compromise  with 
necessity. 

Whence  comes  it  that  the  Eevolution  ended  in  apparent 
failure  and  led  to  a  despotism  worse  than  that  of  Louis  XIV? 
Had  it  been  a  mere  nightmare,  a  carnival  of  mob  violence 
coupled  with  philosophical  fanaticism,  it  would  not  have  lasted 
so  long,  achieved  so  much,  and  created  such  a  powerful 
tradition..  A  dark  picture  has  often  been  drawn  of  the  situa- 
tion on  the  eve  of  the  Consulate — an  empty  treasury,  disorder 
everywhere,  a  victorious  coalition  closing  upon  exhausted  and 

•  Decree  of  Frimaire  16,  Year  IL  t  M.  Clfimenceau. 


50     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXra  CENTURY 

demoralized  France — such  is  the  abysmal  chaos  from  which 
Napoleon  is  supposed  to  have  rescued  the  country.  But  the 
picture  is  overdrawn;  the  situation  was  by  no  means  so 
desperate  as  in  1793.  The  victories  of  Brune  and  Massena 
soon  retrieved  the  early  disasters  of  the  war.  The  royalist 
insurrections  in  the  West  and  in  the  South  could  not  compare 
in  intensity  and  in  organization  with  those  of  five  years 
before;  the  work  of  Hoche  in  Vendee  had  been  well  done. 
'Persecutions  had  practically  ceased;  royalists  were  openly 
active  and  Catholic  worship  was  free.  The  economic  condi- 
tion of  France  was  not  to  be  measured  by  the  hopeless  financial 
troubles  of  the  Government.  War  was  self-supporting,  tribute 
being  levied  on  friend  and  foe.  Conscription  was  a  safety  valve, 
a  remedy  to  unemployment.  Industry  on  the  large  scale  was 
in  its  infancy:  local  industry,  with  insignificant  capital  and 
a  rudimentary  organization,  did  not  suffer  so  radically  from  the 
prevailing  disorder  as  our  more  complex  economic  system  would 
under  similar  circumstances.  Society  under  the  Directoire 
indulged  in  pleasure  and  luxury  with  a  freedom  which  shows  the 
rapid  recuperation  of  the  country.  France  was  still  mainly  an 
aggregation  of  small  agricultural  communities,  and  the  peasants 
were  not  badly  off.  Eoads,  canals,  bridges  were  in  a  dilapidated 
condition:  but  this  handicap  was  compensated  in  many  ways. 
The  peasantry  had  acquired  land;  all  the  feudal  dues  had  been 
abolished  and  the  number  of  compulsory  holidays  greatly 
reduced;  national  taxes  were  collected  with  great  laxity  by 
the  local  authorities  and  were  paid  in  depreciated  paper-money. 
On  his  return  to  France,  Lafayette  was  struck  with  the 
change  (1799)  :  "  You  know  how  many  beggars  and  starvelings 
there  used  to  be  in  your  part  of  the  country:  now  none  is  to 
be  seen;  the  peasants  are  richer,  their  land  better  tilled,  their 
women  better  clothed."  *  There  is  no  doubt  that  France  was 
not  on  the  downgrade. 

If,  therefore,  society  expected  a  "  saviour,"  it  was  not  with 
the  hope  that  he  would  undo  the  work  of  the  Revolution,  but  that 
he  would  make  it  secure.  Although  the  two  decisive  events,  the 
insurrections  of  July  14,  1789,  and  August  10,  1792,  were  the 

•  M4moir98,  quoted  by  Talne,  Oripin«a,  i.  114 — this  before  the  coup 
d'etat  of  Brumaire  could  have  modified  the  state  of  the  country. 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  51 

work  of  the  people,  the  whole  movement  had  been  inspired,  led, 
and  finally  confiscated  by  one  privileged  order,  the  Third  Estate 
or  bourgeoisie.  That  ruling  class  was  craving  for  peace  and 
order,  so  as  to  enjoy  its  newly  acquired  social  prominence  and 
wealth.  Two  dangers  were  to  be  guarded  against :  a  restoration 
of  the  ancient  regime  and  the  advent  of  democracy.  So  the 
bourgeoisie  wished  for  a  government  of  the  same  origin  as  itself ; 
but  as  powerful,  as  conservative,  as  that  of  the  kings.  The  mass 
of  the  people  would  not  object;  they  felt  no  sympathy  for  the 
impotent  oligarchy  of  the  Directoire.  They  were  not  averse  to 
autocracy;  ten  centuries  of  absolute  monarchy,  the  collective 
dictatorship  of  the  Convention,  had  prepared  them  for  Caesarism. 
It  was  manifestly  from  the  army  that  salvation  was  to  be 
expected.  The  army  was  fast  becoming  professional  and  pre- 
torian,  but  it  still  represented  patriotism,  efficiency,  success.  It 
had  created  organized  republics  abroad,  from  Holland  to  Naples : 
why  should  it  not  attempt  the  same  task  at  home?  It  was  the 
very  embodiment  of  national  strength:  the  civil  government,  in 
comparison,  seemed  a  mass  of  corruption  and  factious  strife, 
doomed  to  impotence  and  failure.  It  was,  then,  natural  that  clear- 
sighted politicians  should  cast  their  eyes  about  for  some  energetic 
and  unscrupulous  general,  willing  to  put  the  Directoire  out  of 
its  misery.  Augereau,  Hoche,  Joubert,  Moreau,  many  others, 
including  such  lesser  personalities  as  Hedouville,  were  thought 
of  for  the  work.  Augereau  was  naught  but  a  coarse  soldier, 
and  might  have  been  a  convenient  instrument  in  skilful  hands. 
Hoche  was  one  of  the  noblest  characters  as  well  as  one  of  the 
ablest  commanders  of  the  time,  and  might  have  been  a  French 
Washington.  But  history  cannot  indulge  in  might-have-beens. 
Through  his  undoubted  genius  as  a  general  and  as  an  adminis- 
trator, through  his  no  less  unique  power  of  histrionic  self-adver- 
tisement, through  his  total  absence  of  scruples  and  his  boundless 
ambition,  the  Corsican  imposed  himself  as  the  man  of  the  situa- 
tion. His  political  patrons  and  accomplices — Sieyes,  Barras, 
Talleyrand — still  attempted  to  use  him  as  a  cat's-paw,  with  the 
uncomfortable  suspicion  growing  upon  them  that  they  were  his 
tools.  On  the  18th  of  Brumaire  (November  9,  1799),  after  a 
coup  d'etat  which  was  a  clumsy  farce,  Napoleon  Bonaparte,  at 
the  age  of  thirty,  became  the  master  of  France. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

I.   GENERAL. 

1.  GENERAL. 

A.  RAMBAUD.     Histoire  de  la  Civilisation  Frangaise  au  XlXeme  Siecle. 
18mo,     840     pp.     Eighth    edition.     Armand    Colin,    Paris.     1909. 
(Bibliographies.) 
J.  E.  C.  BODLBT.     France.     2  vols.     8vo.     Macmillan,  New  York  and 

London.     1898. 

A.    FOTJILLEE.     La    Psychologie    du    Peuple    Frangais.     8vo,    391    pp. 
2eme  edition,     Alcan,  Paris.     1898. 

La  France  au  point  de  vue  moral.     8vo,  416  pp.     2eme  edition. 

Alcan,   Paris.     1900. 

BARRETT  WENDELL.  The  France  of  To-day.  8vo.  Scribners,  New 
York.  1908. 

PIERRE  FONCIN.  Le  Pays  de  France.  (Edited  by  A.  Muzzarelli.) 
257  pp.  American  Book  Company.  1902.  (Very  convenient  text- 
book.) 

H.  TAINE.  Les  Origines  de  la  France  Comtemporaine.  11  vols. 
16mo.  +  Index.  Twenty-fifth  edition.  Hachette,  Paris.  1907. 

E.  LEVASSEUR.  Histoire  des  Classes  Ouvrieres  et  de  1'Industrie  en 
France  de  1789  a  1870.  2  vols.  8vo,  749,  912  pp.  Second  edi- 
tion. A.  Rousseau,  Paris.  1903-4. 

Questions  Ouvrieres  et   Industrielles  sous  la  Troisieme   Repub- 

lique.     8vo,  968  pp.     A  Rousseau,  Paris.     1907. 

2.  ICONOGRAPHY. 

A.  DATOT.     L'Histoire  de  France  par  1'Image.     E.  Flammarion,  Paris. 

(Five  albums  on  the  nineteenth  century.) 
A.   PARMENTIER.     Album  Historique.     4th  vol.     4to.     A.  Colin,  Paris. 

1907. 
P.   L.   MOREAU.     Le   Musee  d'Art   au  XlXeme   Siecle.     4to     Larousse. 

1907. 
Collection   du   Touring-Club :    "  Sites   et   Monuments."     32    vols.     4to. 

1902-1906. 
L'lllustration  from  1843. 

3.  BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

H.  P.  THIEME.  Guide  Bibliographique  de  la  Litterature  Frangaise  de 
1800  a  1906.  8vo,  510  pp.  H.  Welter,  Paris-Leipzig. 

G.  LANSON.  Manuel  Bibliographique  de  la  Litterature  Franchise 
Moderne — IV-XIXem«  Siecle.  8vo.  Hachette,  Paris. 

E.  LEVASSEUR.  In  Seances  et  Travaux  de  1'Academie  des  Sciences 
Morales  et  Politiques. 

II.   THE  FOUNDATIONS. 

|  1.  THE  COUNTRY. 

E.  RECLUS.  Geographic  Universelle,  La  France.  8vo.  Hachette, 
Paris.  1877. 


52 


THE  FOUNDATIONS  53 

O.     RECLUS.     Le  Plus  Beau  Royaume  sous  le  Ciel.     8vo.     Hachette. 

1899. 
J.   MICHELET.     Tableau  de  la  France    (Notre  Prance,  sa  geographic, 

son  histoire).     12mo.     Flammarion.     1886. 
VIDAL  DE  LA  BLACHE.     Tableau  Geographique  (first  volume  of  Histoire 

de  France,  edited  by  E.  Lavisse).     8vo.     Hachette,  Paris. 
VIDAL  DE   LA  BLACHE  and  CAMEINA  D' ALMEIDA.     La  France.     Colin. 

1897. 

MARCEL  DUBOIS  and  BERNARD.     La  France.     Masson.     1894. 
F.  SCHRADER  and  GALLOUEDEC.     La  France.     Hachette.     1898. 

ATLASES. 

VIDAL-LABLACHE.     Atlas  de  Geographic.     Colin,  Paris. 

F.    SCHRADER,    F.    PRUDENT    and    E.    ANTHOINE.     A.    de    Geographic 

Moderne    (especially    Map    No.    9,    map    and    notice).     Hachette, 

Paris,   1907. 
F.    SCHRADER    (editor).     Atlas   de    Geographic   Historique.     Hachette, 

Paris.     1907. 

§  2  and  3.  THE  RACE   (a)   Language. 

KR.  NYROP.     Grammaire  Historique  de  la  Langue  Frangaise   (bibliog- 
raphies).    8vo.     Copenhagen.     1899   seq. 

F.  BRUNOT.     Histoire  de   la  Langue   Frangaise  des  Origines  a  1900. 

8vo.     Colin,  Paris.     1905  aeq. 
A.    DAUZAT.     La   Langue    Franchise    d'Aujourd'hui :    evolution,    prob- 

lemes.     18mo,   275  pp.     Colin,  Paris.     1908. 
Congres  International  pour  1'Extension   et   la  Culture  de  la  Langue 

Frangaise.     lere    session,    Liege,     1905.     8vo.     Champion,     Paris. 

Published    1906.     2eme    session,    Arlon-Treves-Luxembourg,    1908. 

8vo.     M.  Weissenbruch,  Bruxelles.     Published  1908. 

(b)   Ethnology  and   (c)   Anthropology. 
W.    Z.    RIPLET.     The   Races   of  Europe.     8vo,    624   pp.     D.   Appleton, 

New  York.     1899. 
The  Races  of  Europe,  Supplement :  A  Selected  Bibliography  of  the 

Anthropology  and  Ethnology  of  Europe.     D.  Appleton,  New  York. 

1899. 

(d)  Psychology  of  the  French  People.     (Cf.  Fouillee,  Barrett  Wendell,  op. 

cit.) 

W.    C.    BROWNELL.     French    Traits.     411    pp.     Scribners,    New    York. 
1908. 

G.  D'AVENEL.     Les  Frangais  de  mon  Tempa     350  pp.     Eighth  edition. 

Nelson,  Paris.     1910. 

{  4.  THE  TRADITION:   ANCIENT  REGIME  AND  REVOLUTION. 

H.    TAINE.     Les    Origines    de    la    France    Contemporaine,    L'Ancien 

Regime. 
A.  DE  TOCQUEVILLE.     L'Ancien  Regime  et  la  Revolution.     Levy,  Paris. 

1*56. 
ALBERT  SOREL.     L'Europe  et  la  Revolution  Frangaise   (I.  Les  Moeurs 

Politiques  et  les  Traditions).     8  vols.     8vo.     Plon-Nourrit,  Paris. 

1885-1904. 
E.  FAGUET  et  dl.     L'CEuvre  Sociale  de  la  Revolution.     460  pp.     Fonte- 

moing,  Paris. 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE 

I.  THE  REVOLUTION 

1789  May  5.     Summons  of  the  States  General. 
June  17.     National  Constituent  Assembly. 
June  20.     Oath  of  the  Tennis  Court. 
July  14.     Storming  of  the  Bastille. 
August  4.     Voluntary  surrender  of  feudal  righta 

1791  June  20.     Plight  of  the  King  to  Varennes. 

October  1.     Legislative  Assembly  (to  September,  1792). 
1792-99  War  between  France  and  the  Coalition.      (1)  Prussia  and  Austria. 

1792  June   20   and  August   10.     Insurrections.     The  Tuileries  invaded. 

Louis  XVI  suspended. 

September  2-7.     Massacres  in  the  prisons  of  Paris. 
September  20-21.     Victory  of  Valmy.     Meeting  of  the  Convention. 

First  Republic. 

1793  January   21.     Execution  of  Louis   XVI.     War   against  England, 

Spain,  Sardinia.  Civil  War  in  Vendee  and  the  South.  Com- 
mittee of  Public  Safety.  Reign  of  Terror.  Marat.  Dictator- 
ship of  the  Jacobins  and  Robespierre. 

1794  July  27   (Thermidor  9).     Fall  of  Robespierre. 
1794-95  Thermidorian  Reaction. 

1795-99  Dirsctoire  (cf.  Table  II). 


54 


CHAPTER   II 
NAPOLEON 

Growth  of  Napoleon's  power — Three  main  elements:  glory,  effi- 
ciency, tyranny. 

§  1.  MILITARY  GLORY. 

"  l/Epop^e  " — Napoleon  as  stage-manager — The  army :  its  variety 
of  gorgeous  uniforms — Pageants — Monuments  of  triumph  :  columns, 
arches,  temples — Pretorianism :  Napoleon-worship  in  the  army — Its 
limits— The  seamy  side  of  militarism :  looting  on  the  heroic  scale — 
Reluctant  heroes — Growing1  indifference  of  the  country. 

The  burden — Financially  light — Conscription  drains  the  blood  of 
the  nation. 

THE  18th  of  Brumaire  marks  the  beginning  of  a  prodigious 
adventure.  The  fate  of  the  nation  became  identified  with  that 
of  one  man,  and  that  man,  in  spite  of  all  his  realistic  genius, 
was  intoxicated  with  his  own  vertiginous  ascent.  Napoleon's 
name  stands  alone  during  those  fifteen  years.  It  irresistibly 
evokes  the  ideas  of  martial  glory,  political  tyranny,  and  adminis- 
trative reorganization.  For  the  sake  of  clearness,  we  shall  con- 
sider separately  these  three  aspects  of  the  Bonapartist  regime. 
But  we  need  hardly  say  that  in  Napoleon  the  conqueror,  the 
efficient  ruler,  and  the  despot  were  one  and  the  same.  The  reader 
should  also  bear  in  mind  that  Napoleon's  unlimited  autocracy  did 
not  spring  full-grown  into  existence.  Posterity  knows  that  the 
18th  of  Brumaire  meant  a  new  departure  in  the  course  of  French 
history,  "but  the  contemporaries  were  unconscious  of  any  por- 
tentous change.  France  received  the  news  with  curious  apathy. 
There  was  practically  no  opposition;  but  neither  was  there  any 
sign  that  the  country,  in  a  frenzy  of  enthusiasm,  was  consciously 
55 


56     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

hurling  itself  into  servitude.  A  coup  d'etat  was  no  striking 
novelty;  the  Directorial  machinery  had  three  times  already  been 
thrown  out  of  gear.  Five  unpopular  Directors  were  superseded 
by  three  "Provisional  Consuls,"  that  was  all.  One  of  these, 
Roger-Ducos,  was  insignificant  enough.  Another,  the  former 
Abbe  Sieyes,  oracle  of  the  Constituent  Assembly  and  political 
philosopher,  was  the  incarnation  of  moderate,  pacific,  and,  in  a 
sense,  liberal  ideas.  Bonaparte  was  a  young  general  famed  no 
less  for  his  administrative  and  diplomatic  achievements  than  for 
his  victories  on  the  battlefield.  All  were  apparently  loyal  to  the 
cause  of  the  Revolution.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that, 
for  a  few  months  at  least,  the  ideal  of  France  and  the  ideal  of 
Bonaparte  were  the  same:  at  home,  order  without  reaction; 
abroad,  peace  with  honour.  One  of  the  first  acts  of  the  young 
Consul  was  to  put  away  his  military  uniform.  He  made  at  once 
public  overtures  of  peace  to  England  and  Austria.  The  treaties 
of  Luneville  and  Amiens  were  his  best  titles  to  the  grateful 
admiration  of  the  French.  When  hostilities  were  resumed,  as 
much  through  England's  fault  as  through  his  own,  he  was  skilful 
enough  to  throw  the  whole  burden  of  responsibility  upon  the 
enemy.  On  the  18th  of  Brumaire,  losing  his  self-control  at  a 
critical  moment,  he  had  relapsed  into  the  turgid  style  of  his  youth 
and  called  himself  "  the  God  of  Fortune  and  War."  But  this 
strangely  prophetic  utterance  was  not  taken  seriously  at  the  time. 
In  Bonaparte  some  Frenchmen  would  see  a  General  Monk,  some 
a  Washington,*  many  a  Cromwell,  few,  as  yet,  a  Caesar — none, 
not  even  himself,  could  anticipate  Napoleon. 

Bonaparte's  ambition  knew  no  internal  check:  he  had  no 
scruple,  a  limited  culture,  and  boundless  contempt  for  "  ideology  " 
and  "imponderable"  forces.  The  miracles  of  the  Revolution 
and  those  of  his  early  career  had  left  the  word  "impossible" 
without  a  meaning.  Circumstances  made  him,  in  France,  the 
arbiter  of  all  parties  and  the  servant  of  none;  in  Europe,  the 
autocratic  head  of  the  most  powerful  State,  flushed  with  victory, 
drilled  in  ten  years  of  war,  a  generation  ahead  of  its  opponents 
in  national  spirit  and  revolutionary  tactics.  Thus  his  apparent 

•  The  ceremony  In  honour  of  Washington,  early  in  the  Consulate,  seemed 
to  imply  a  promise. 


NAPOLEON  57 

power  grew  year  by  year,  and  his  ambition  with  it:  until  the 
sane  ruler  of  1800  turned  into  the  monstrous  self-idol  of  1812, 
and  the  whole  crazy  fabric  collapsed  like  a  house  of  cards. 

Napoleon's  rule  was  essentially  despotic,  but  it  found  its 
justification  in  its  popular  origin,  its  glory  abroad,  its  efficiency 
at  home.  Of  these,  glory,  in  popular  imagination,  is  by  far  the 
most  potent.  Although  the  French  have  recovered  from  their 
latest  attack  of  Napoleonitis,  the  campaigns  of  the  First  Empire 
are  still  referred  to  as  "  L'Epopee,"  the  French  Iliad,  the 
epic  of  war  par  excellence:  and  few  men  indeed,  even  in 
England,  even  in  America,  can  resist  the  intoxication  of  that 
unexampled  series  of  triumphs.  It  was  the  time  when  the 
battery  of  the  Hotel  des  Invalides  boomed  incessantly,  spreading 
throughout  Paris  the  news  of  some  dazzling  victory — Austerlitz, 
Jena,  Friedland,  Wagram;  the  time  when  the  French  armies 
entered  one  foreign  capital  after  another — 'Rome,  Madrid,  Vienna, 
Berlin;  when  the  Empire,  with  its  allied  and  feudatory  States, 
spread  from  the  Tagus  to  the  Vistula ;  when  Napoleon's  brothers 
wore  crowns  in  Westphalia,  Holland,  Naples,  and  Spain;  when 
at  Erfurt  the  Emperor  had  Talma,  his  favourite  tragedian,  play 
before  an  audience  of  kings;  when  soldiers  said  of  some  old 
comrade  of  theirs — Berthier,  Bernadotte,  or  Murat — of  plebeian 
origin  and  risen  from  the  ranks  like  themselves :  "  He  has 
been  promoted  Grand  Duke,  Prince,  or  King,"  as  in  our  hum- 
drum days  they  would  say :  "  He  has  been  made  Major- 
General."  Even  in  the  prose  of  Thiers — the  incarnation  of 
Philistine  common  sense — the  story  of  the  Empire  reads  like  a 
fairy-tale. 

But  although  plain  truth  was  stranger  than  fiction,  Napoleon 
was  not  yet  satisfied.  The  art  of  self-advertisement  and  lavish 
display  has  ever  been  an  essential  element  of  statecraft:  the 
new  Caesar  could  have  out-Barnumed  Barnum  and  given  useful 
hints  to  our  popular  journalists.  His  bulletins  and  proclama- 
tions are  masterpieces  in  that  line.  It  was  he,  and  not  Desaix, 
who  received  credit  for  the  battle  of  Marengo;  Jena  has  cast 
into  the  shade  the  parallel  and  more  meritorious  success  of 
Davout  at  Auerstaedt;  the  useless  slaughters  of  Eylau  and 
Essling  are  still  counted  by  the  French  among  his  victories.. 


58     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

All  his  failures,  and  the  achievements  of  everybody  else,  are 
glossed  over  with  consummate  skill.  Fouche's  impardonable 
offence  was  his  independent  and  energetic  attitude  at  the 
time  when  Napoleon  was  hemmed  in  by  the  Austrians  in  the 
Lobau  Island  and  the  English  had  landed  at  Walcheren.  No 
theatrical  star  ever  engineered  her  success  with  more  skill  and 
care  and  monopolized  more  jealously  the  limelight  than 
Bonaparte. 

The  army  was  no  longer  merely  an  instrument  of  defence  and 
conquest:  it  was  a  gorgeous  pageant  for  the  entertainment  of 
his  innumerable  subjects.  The  austere  Republican  troops  of 
Kle"ber  and  Hoche,  barefooted,  with  their  plain  blue  uniforms 
threadbare  and  tattered,  were  succeeded  by  regiments  of  all 
kinds,  origins,  and  colours.  Famous  to  the  present  day  are  the 
Grenadiers  and  Voltigeurs  of  the  Line;  the  Hussars,  each  of 
their  ten  regiments  with  some  distinctive  detail  of  dress  or 
equipment;  the  twenty-six  regiments  of  Mounted  Chasseurs,  a 
dashing  light  cavalry ;  the  Dragoons,  the  Lancers,  the  Cuirassiers, 
the  splendid  Carabiniers,  with  red-crested  helmets  and  a  golden 
sun  on  their  steel  breast-plates.  To  these  French  troops,  old 
and  new,  were  added  foreign  auxiliaries  of  all  nations,  regular 
levies  from  allies  and  friends,  volunteers  from  neutral  States — 
Swiss,  Spanish,  Bavarian  soldiers,  Illyrian  sharpshooters,  the 
admirable  Polish  light-horse,  whom  the  French  people  have  not 
yet  forgotten,  Albanians  and  Greeks,  a  battalion  from  the  Ionian 
Isles,  a  squadron  of  Tartars.  The  pride  of  Napoleon's  heart 
was  his  Guard.  The  arch-egotist  had  but  few  genuinely  human 
sentiments :  his  affection  for  his  old  "  Grumblers "  was  one  of 
them.  The  Guard,  old  and  new,  grew  to  be  a  host  in  itself. 
Towards  the  end  of  the  regime  it  numbered  ninety-two  thousand 
men.  But  it  was  a  host  of  picked  soldiers.  All  corps,  except 
the  Carabiniers,  were  represented  in  it.  Most  intimately  con- 
nected with  the  Master  were  the  Guides,  his  constant  companions, 
whose  uniform  was  the  green  livery  of  his  household ;  and  most 
picturesque  were  the  Mameluks,  with  green  turbans,  rallying 
round  horse-tails,  a  devoted  band  who  fought  bravely  throughout 
all  these  wars  and  were  massacred  in  1815  by  the  fanatical 
populace  of  Marseilles. 


NAPOLEON  59 

All  these  troops  were  splendidly  arrayed  for  show  rather  than 
for  efficiency  and  comfort.  The  tight-fitting  uniforms,  the  rigid 
and  tremendously  high  collars,  the  towering  fur  cap  of  the 
grenadier  are  a  joy  for  the  military  painter — Gros,  Ge"ricault, 
Eaffet,  Charlet,  Meissonnier,  or  Detaille — but  they  must  have 
been  purgatory  for  the  wearer — we  have  Coignet's  word  for  it, 
and  that  "  Grognard "  is  not  addicted  to  excessive  grumbling. 
Magnificent  were  the  staff-officers,  all  a-glitter  with  heavy  braids 
of  gold  on  their  bright  red  or  blue  uniforms,  with  gorgeous 
plumes  swaying  over  their  heads.  This  reached  a  climax  in 
brilliant  cavalrymen  like  Lassalle,  and  especially  in  Joachim 
Murat.  This  swashbuckler  and  circus  rider  on  the  heroic  scale 
spent  twenty-seven  thousand  francs  on  feathers  for  the  single 
campaign  of  Prussia.  By  a  supreme  contrast  which  reveals  the 
romantic  taste  of  the  great  conqueror,  Napoleon  himself  would 
affect  to  remain  "  the  shorn  one,"  the  "  little  corporal " — 
entering  Berlin  in  a  plain  uniform  and  with  a  penny  cockade  on 
the  characteristic  "  little  hat,"  or  wrapped  through  many  cam- 
paigns in  his  no  less  famous  riding-coat  of  grey. 

After  the  pageant  of  his  reviews,  victorious  returns,  and 
triumphal  entries,  he  would  erect  to  his  own  glory  more  lasting 
monuments,  theatrical  but  effective  pastiches  of  that  Roman 
splendour  which  haunted  his  imagination.  The  Little  Corporal 
would  pose  as  Caesar.  Thus  were  planned  the  Boulogne  and 
the  Vendome  columns,  both  crowned  with  his  statue ;  the  Temple 
of  Victory,  which  was  to  become  the  Church  of  St.  Mary 
Magdalen ;  the  Arch  of  the  Carrousel,  a  correct  imitation  of  that 
of  Septimius  Severus ;  the  "  Arc  de  PEtoile,"  not  completed  until 
1836,  and  which  its  size  and  location,  the  simplicity  of  its  line 
and  the_  beauty  of  its  sculptural  ornamentation  make  wonderfully 
impressive.  He  wanted  posterity  to  be  dazzled,  as  well  as  his 
own  generation.  And  he  succeeded.  The  act  of  the  Commune, 
tearing  down  the  Vendome  column,  is  considered  by  all  orthodox 
historians  as  a  piece  of  barbarous  folly. 

It  was  not  in  appearance  alone  that  the  army  had  changed 
since  Republican  days  were  over:  the  whole  spirit  was  different. 
We  have  no  wish  to  idealize  the  "Volunteers  of  1792,"  or  to 
depreciate  the  patriotism,  endurance,  and  courage  of  Napoleon's 


60     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-rn  CENTURY 

soldiers.  But  for  a  few  years  the  army  had  been  democratic, 
disinterested,  devoted  to  the  ideal :  Bonaparte's  proclamation  to 
his  troops  at  the  beginning  of  the  Italian  campaign  struck  a  new 
note.  Henceforth  professional  pride  and  ambition,  the  contempt 
of  civil  life,  the  greed  of  booty,  and  fanatical  loyalty  to  one 
leader,  will  take  the  place  of  Republican  virtues.  Pride  and 
loyalty  Napoleon  knew  how  to  foster  better  than  any  general 
before  or  since.  First  of  all,  he  was  genuinely  interested  in  the 
welfare  of  his  men,  and  would  pay  attention  to  the  minutest 
detail  of  their  camp  or  barrack  life.  They  were  naught  but  tools 
in  his  hands,  but,  as  every  good  workman,  he  loved  his  tools. 
The  rank  and  file  felt  that  in  his  abruptness,  his  familiarity,  his 
occasional  coarseness  with  them  there  really  lurked  a  sort  of 
rough-and-ready  affection.  The  great  Emperor  was  one  of  them. 
In  a  sense  they  were  his  family.  He  bribed  them  with  childish 
and  heroic  distinctions :  the  splendid  uniforms  referred  to  above, 
silver  swords  or  rifles  "  to  the  brave,"  and  the  Cross  of  the 
Legion  of  Honour,  which  has  remained  a  potent  factor  in 
French  life  to  the  present  day.  He  even  stooped  to  trickery: 
he  would  stop,  apparently  by  the  merest  chance,  before  some 
private  soldier,  call  him  out  by  name,  remind  him  that  he  had 
seen  him  in  Italy,  at  the  Pyramids,  or  maybe  in  Spain.  The 
little  comedy  might  have  been  arranged  in  all  its  details  before- 
hand, but  its  effect  was  unfailing.  There  were  higher  elements 
in  the  devotion  of  the  soldiers  to  their  Emperor:  loyalty,  hero- 
worship,  a  sense  that  they  were  sharing  with  him  his  vertiginous 
glory,  that  under  his  guidance  they  were  ruling  the  world. 

However,  we  must  not  believe  that  the  devotion,  even  of  the 
Old  Guard,  was  as  blind  and  pure  as  legends  will  have  it.  It 
was  not  without  a  cause  that  he  called  his  Grenadiers 
"  grumblers,"  and,  after  1807,  when  they  ceased  to  understand 
the  purpose  of  his  continuous  wars,  the  grumbling  was  bitter  and 
loud  enough.  Not  only  at  Leipzig  and  in  Russia,  but  just  before 
Wagram,  Coignet  heard  strong  words  of  blame  and  disaffection. 
Neither  should  we  refuse  to  see  the  faults  of  the  heroes  of  the 
Grand  Army.  The  permanent  element  within  its  ranks  soon 
developed  all  the  vices  of  professional  soldiery:  brutality,  arro- 
gance, dishonesty,  drunkenness,  and  profligacy.  The  last  two, 


NAPOLEON  61 

combined  with  the  exhausting  tasks  imposed  by  the  Master, 
wrought  worse  havoc  than  sword  or  bullet.  Epidemics  were 
frequent,  enteritis  a  constant  menace.  Broussais,  the  great 
doctor,  preached  temperance,  but  in  vain. 

With  all  their  grumbling,  the  French  soldiers  loved  their  flag. 
The  Germans  of  the  Rhine  Provinces,  although  recently  annexed, 
were  no  whit  behind  the  French  of  old  France  in  courage  and 
loyalty.  Some  Italian  troops  were  willing,  and  the  Poles  were 
heroic  to  the  last.  But  the  allies  and  auxiliaries,  pressed  into 
service  in  hostile  parts  and  vassal  kingdoms,  were  driven  to 
the  slaughter  like  cattle,  and  ever  ready  to  stampede.  Coignet, 
in  his  Memoirs,  has  a  gruesome  tale  of  a  rabble  of  stragglers 
and  deserters  who  had  shot  their  officers  on  the  march  to 
Moscow.  With  extreme  difficulties  he  led  them  back  to  head- 
quarters, where  some  six-score  of  them,  mostly  Spaniards,  were 
executed  to  teach  the  rest  a  lesson. 

If  the  privates  drank,  gambled,  and  stole,  they  were  merely 
following  the  example  of  their  superiors,  from  Marshal  to 
sergeant.  Napoleon  himself  made  looting  a  part  of  military 
administration.  He  rifled  Italy  for  the  Directoire,  and  the 
penniless  adventurer  found  himself  rich  at  the  end  of  this  one 
campaign.  He  confiscated  private  and  public  properties,  imposed 
fines,  war  taxes  and  indemnities,  in  a  grandiose  manner  which 
every  one  imitated  on  a  more  modest  scale.  Massena  made 
himself  particularly  infamous.  Soult  was  not  a  bad  second,  nor 
were  most  of  the  others  lagging  far  behind.  Napoleon  seized 
the  ill-gotten  gains  of  Massena  to  the  amount  of  six  million 
francs,  and  the  hero  of  Zurich  and  Genoa  did  not  dare  to  protest. 
But  in  most  cases  the  Emperor  would  close  his  eyes.  "  The 
soldier  must  have  his  reward,"  he  said ;  and  he  thought  that  the 
misdeeds  thus  condoned  would  place  his  Marshals  at  his  mercy. 
It  was  a  great  mistake:  corruption  breeds  ingratitude.  The 
men  whom  he  despised  despised  him  in  return,  and  betrayed  him 
in  his  hour  of  need.  It  is  no  pleasant  task  thus  to  dwell  on  the 
se,amy  side  of  a  splendid  period.  Yet  it  must  be  done,  if  -we 
want  to  have  a  true  picture  of  the  times. 

Even  though  Napoleon's  contemporaries  did  not  know  all  the 
sordid  tales  which  have  gradually  come  to  light,  they  were  not 


62     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

impressed  with  the  country's  warlike  glory  in  exactly  the  same 
way  as  we  might  expect.  No  doubt  Napoleon  aroused  fanaticism 
in  many  of  his  soldiers,  in  young  men  brought  up  in  the  worship 
of  the  national  hero,  in  citizens  of  the  annexed  provinces,  for 
whom  he  represented  the  new  regime  with  all  its  benefits; 
among  his  enemies,  in  particular  in  England,  he  was  hated  and 
feared  with  an  intensity  which  gave  him  a  superhuman,  if 
satanic,  importance.  But  with  the  majority  of  the  French  this 
was  by  no  means  the  case.  They  appreciated  the  internal  order 
and  efficient  administration  that  the  Consular  and  Imperial 
Governments  gave  France;  but  in  spite  of  loud  semi-official 
demonstrations,  victories  no  longer  tickled  their  vanity.  After 
ten  and  twenty  years  of  continuous  and  triumphant  conflicts, 
they  were  sated  with  military  glory.  "  Another  victory !  "  they 
would  say  at  each  new  bulletin,  and  shrug  their  shoulders  with 
growing  indifference.  Marengo  was  genuinely  popular,  because 
it  saved  France  from  the  nightmare  of  invasion — although 
Zurich  was  really  the  turning-point  in  the  fortune  of  the 
campaign.  Austerlitz  and  Jena  still  roused  some  enthusiasm. 
The  wars  of  the  following  eight  years  brought  little  joy  and 
many  dark  misgivings.  It  is  reported  that  Napoleon,  noticing 
that  he  was  greeted  at  the  Opera  with  an  outburst  of  applause 
less  enthusiastic  than  usual,  turned  to  his  staff  officers  and  said : 
"  Gentlemen,  we  must  be  ready  to  enter  the  field  within  a 
month."  But  Napoleon  was  mistaking  for  a  popular  demand  his 
own  craving  for  the  exciting  game  of  war.  He  also  felt  that  his 
regime  of  autocracy,  barely  tolerable  under  martial  law,  as  it 
were,  could  not  survive  a  prolonged  period  of  peace.  He  is  not 
alone  responsible  for  the  wars  of  his  reign :  France  and  Europe 
are  not  without  their  share  of  guilt;  England  in  particular 
failed  to  understand  the  Revolution,  and  acted  with  the  same 
combination  of  cunning,  violence,  and  selfishness  as  the  Emperor 
himself.  Yet  it  is  impossible  to  shift  the  main  burden  from 
Napoleon's  shoulders.  A  greater  genius  or  a  better  man,  a 
Hoche,  a  Carnot,  a  Washington,  or  even  a  Lafayette,  might  have 
preserved  peace  on  the  strict  terms  of  Luneville  and  Amiens. 

Whilst  by  degrees  the  intoxication  of  glory  was  leaving  the 
French,  the  burden  of  war  grew  heavier.    We  do  not  mean, 


NAPOLEON  63 

however,  the  financial  burden,  for  that  was  surprisingly  light. 
First  of  all,  the  armies  of  the  Empire,  gigantic  as  they  seemed 
to  contemporaries,  were  not  large  compared  with  modern 
"  peace "  establishments.  In  the  Grand  Army,  as  it  entered 
Eussia,  there  were  only  355,913  Frenchmen,  and  probably  one- 
third  came  from  recently  annexed  provinces — Rhine,  'Piedmont, 
etc.  The  present  Republic  keeps  nearly  600,000  men  under 
arms  (with  the  navy  and  the  colonial  troops)  and  is  going  to 
increase  that  number.  The  administration  of  the  army  formed 
a  separate  department,  distinct  from  the  War  Office  and  ably 
directed  by  civilians ;  if  there  was  much  plundering  abroad,  there 
was  comparatively  little  corruption  and  waste  at  home: 
Napoleon  himself  supervised  closely  his  military  contractors. 
Above  all,  Napoleon  made  war  self-supporting:  "War  must 
provide  for  war  "  was  his  maxim.  Hence  the  crushing  tributes 
laid  under  different  pretexts  on  the  conquered,  and  even  on 
neutral  States.  Portugal  and  Spain  were  thus  bled,  the  one  of 
20,000,000  fr.  in  1801,  the  other  of  24,000,000  fr.  in  1806.  The 
result  was  that  in  1814  the  war-debt  of  France  was  extremely 
small,  whilst  England  was  staggering  under  hers. 

But  the  cost  in  blood  was  more  grievous.  At  first  the  middle 
class  did  not  suffer:  the  Revolutionary  regime  of  universal 
service  was  mitigated  in  1800  and  in  1804;  only  a  certain 
portion  of  the  contingent  designated  by  lot  (tirage  au  sort) 
joined  the  colours,  and  those  whom  fate  had  thus  selected  could 
pay  a  substitute  (remplac,ant).  But  already  after  Jena  it  was 
found  necessary  to  call  in  every  one,  and  even  to  levy  80,000  men 
who  should  not  have  been  drafted  until  the  following  year.  In 
1808,  160,000  men  were  called  one  and  two  years  ahead  of  time. 
In  1809,  three  "  classes  "  (yearly  contingents)  already  liberated 
were  called  back  and  two  more  levied  in  anticipation.  In 
1813,  180,000  national  guards,  who  had  previously  been 
exempted  from  service  in  the  regular  army,  either  because  they 
were  too  weak  or  had  families  to  support,  were  drafted  into  the 
active  forces:  these  and  boys  from  the  schools  were  the  pale 
and  puny  "Marie-Louise,"  who,  in  smock-frock  and  wooden 
shoes,  fought  heroically  at  La  Fere-Champenoise.  Some  three 
million  Frenchmen  thus  ventured  their  lives  from  1800  to  1815, 


64     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

and  it  was  asserted  officially  by  M.  d'Hargenvilliers,  Director  of 
Conscription  under  Napoleon,  that  1,750,000  died  of  wounds, 
disease,  fatigue,  and  exposure.  Whoever  attempted  to  escape 
his  fate  (refractaire,  defaulting  recruit)  was  hunted  down  like  a 
criminal;  after  1811  his  family  and  friends  were  made  respon- 
sible for  him.  The  sons  of  prominent  families  were  compelled 
to  become  officers,  and  in  certain  cases  actually  kidnapped  into 
Saint-Cyr;  they  were  hostages  for  the  good  behaviour  of  their 
parents.  Every  year  the  Moloch  of  war  was  growing  more 
insatiable,  and  there  was  no  relief  to  be  hoped  for — except  in 
defeat.  Napoleon  was  a  true  prophet  when  he  told  Madame 
de  Eemusat :  "  Do  you  know  what  people  will  say  when  I 
disappear?  They  will  say,  '  Ouf!'" — an  expression  of  intense 
relief. 

§  2.  THE  REORGANIZATION  OF  FRANCE. 

Administrative  Reorganization. — Efficient  but  hasty — Was  over- 
centralization  inevitable? — The  Concordat  and  the  University:  their 
failure — The  Civil  Code:  its  merits,  influence,  and  limitations — The 
Prefectoral  administration — "  A  free  career  open  to  all  talents  " — 
Privilege  soon  creeping  back. 

Political  Reconstruction. — Democracy  conjured  away — Napoleon 
the  arbiter  of  all  parties,  the  prisoner  of  none — The  four  Assemblies : 
elaborate  impotence — Universal  suffrage :  the  list  of  notables,  the 
plebiscites — The  Press  gagged — Bastilles  restored — "  The  Emperor's 
pleasure  " — Baleful  influence  of  Napoleonism. 

Glory  abroad,  efficiency  at  home !  We  have  seen  how  far 
from  pure  that  glory  was,  and  the  terrible  price  France  had  to 
pay  for  it.  The  civil  reorganization  of  the  country  is  a  much 
better  title:  this  it  is  that  makes  the  difference  between  a 
Napoleon  and  a  Tamburlaine.  He  himself  thought,  or  at  least 
said,  that  his  achievements  in  civil  life  would  far  outshine  his 
bloody  victories,  and  that  his  Codes  were  a  monument  to  his 
memory  more  lasting  than  Austerlitz.  The  spectacular  recon- 
struction of  France  under  the  Consulate  is  one  of  the  brilliant 
pages  in  history.  He  assumed  control  of  a  nation  renovated  by 
a  radical  revolution,  teeming  with  young  but  misdirected  energies, 
untrammelled  by  old  conventions  and  prejudices — a  nation  which 
in  ten  years  had  already  achieved  wonders.  But  that  country 


NAPOLEON  66 

was  panting  and  bleeding  after  a  decade  of  foreign  and  civil 
wars.  The  one  thing  she  wanted  was  internal  peace  and  order, 
and  these  the  strong  government  of  Bonaparte  undoubtedly 
provided.  As  soon  as  normal  conditions  were  restored,  the 
transformation  was  magical,  and  the  man  who  was  not  the 
promoter,  but  an  important  factor  in  that  transformation,  should 
receive  his  due  meed  of  gratitude.  In  a  few  months  chaos  dis- 
appeared; in  a  few  months — therein  lies  the  unique  appeal  of 
this  great  work,  and  its  fault.  It  was  efficient,  but  hasty.  Many 
worthless  ruins  of  the  old  regime  were  hurriedly  adapted  to 
modern  needs,  because  they  lay  ready  at  hand;  many  curious 
and  promising  attempts  of  the  Revolution  were  no  less  hastily 
discarded,  because  they  were  still  in  the  experimental  stage.  In 
everything  regularity,  unity,  authority,  which  make  a  fine  show 
and  bring  about  immediate  results,  were  preferred  to  liberty, 
competition,  local  differences.  In  this  Napoleon  was  following 
his  own  inclination  as  a  military  commander,  used  to  rigid 
discipline;  but  he  was  also  continuing  the  tradition  of  mon- 
archy by  divine  right ;  he  was  one  of  those  "  beneficent  despots," 
"  enlightened  tyrants,"  praised  by  the  philosophers  of  the 
eighteenth  century;  he  was  true  to  his  Jacobin  origins.  This 
explains  why  there  was  so  little  opposition  to  his  activities,  and 
why  there  was  and  still  is  so  much  admiration  for  them.  Some 
historians,  Mr.  Bodley  among  others,  seem  to  think  that  Napoleon 
had  a  profound  knowledge  of  the  French  mind,  and  that  with  a 
Latin,  Catholic,  logical  and  equalitarian  nation,  no  better  course 
could  have  been  followed.  But  did  not  Napoleon  bank  on  the 
least  admirable  traits  of  the  French  character?  Even  if  Mr. 
Bodley's  definition  of  France  be  accepted  in  toto,  there  is  such 
a  thing  as  national  education  and  evolution.  At  the  close  of  the 
Revolution  the  coexistence  of  radically  different  parties  and 
religions  had  led,  through  sheer  weariness,  to  the  most  natural 
and  most  desirable  solution — liberty  for  all.  The  Thennidorian 
Reaction  and  the  Directoire  had  been  driven  to  this  without 
approving  of  it  theoretically,  and  with  occasional  relapses  into 
fanaticism.  The  regime  of  liberty  had  not  yet  borne  all  its 
fruit,  because  foreign  affairs  and  home  politics  were  still  un- 
settled; but  several  sects  lived  side  by  side,  peaceably  on  the 


66     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-rn  CENTURY 

whole,  and  the  restoration  of  order  immediately  brought  about 
the  creation  of  many  schools.  The  Concordat  with  Borne,  the 
creation  of  the  Imperial  University  monopolizing  the  whole 
educational  system  of  the  country,  were  decidedly  reactionary 
steps,  methods  used  by  the  Consul  or  the  Emperor  for  enforcing 
discipline  and  strengthening  autocracy.  We  shall  examine  these 
two  great  measures  in  later  chapters;  but  we  may  say  at  once 
that  both  failed.  No  regime  had  worse  difficulties  with  Eome 
than  Napoleon's:  less  than  ten  years  after  the  signature  of  the 
Concordat  the  Emperor  was  excommunicated  and  the  Pope  his 
prisoner.  No  country  has  had  a  worse  Church  problem  than 
France  throughout  the  nineteenth  century,  whilst  the  United 
States  have  developed  normally  on  the  basis  of  liberty.  The 
monopoly  of  State  education  broke  down  by  the  vote  of  the 
Falloux  law  in  1850,  after  forty  years  of  bitter  conflict.  But 
even  before  that  time  it  utterly  failed  to  restore  or  to  create  in 
France  that  unity  which  the  sovereign  was  hankering  after. 
Napoleon's  admirers  claim  that  France  was  not  fit  for  a  liberal 
regime.  The  truth  is  that  she  was  not  yet  educated  up  to  one. 
But  there  was  no  advantage  in  postponing  by  several  generations 
the  moment  when  this  severe  and  indispensable  apprenticeship 
should  begin. 

The  Civil  Code  is  Napoleon's  best  work.  Of  course  the  actual 
labour  of  compiling  the  2,281  articles  which  it  contained  was 
done  by  professional  jurists — Tronchet,  Bigot  de  Pre"ameneu, 
Portalis,  Maleville,  Cambaceres,  Treilhard,  etc.  But  the  role 
of  Napoleon  was  not  merely  that  of  a  sovereign  who  "  is  pleased 
to  order  "  that  a  thing  shall  be  done,  endorses  and  promulgates 
it  when  it  is  completed,  and  ascribes  to  himself  all  the  merit. 
It  was  through  his  decision  and  energy  that  the  project  was 
elaborated  in  the  incredibly  short  time  of  four  months.  He 
took  active  part  in  the  long  discussions  that  followed  in  the 
Council  of  State,  and  often  astonished  his  highly  trained  col- 
laborators by  the  keenness  and  breadth  of  his  intelligence. 
He  had  to  conquer  the  opposition  of  the  Tribunate  and  the  Legis- 
lative Body,  still  endowed  with  some  sparks  of  independence, 
and  he  did  not  scruple  to  use  unconstitutional  expedients.  The 
Code,  finally  promulgated  on  March  21,  1804,  deserves  indeed 


NAPOLEON  67 

the  name  which  Europe  gave  it  spontaneously  from  the  first — 
Code  Napoleon.  Its  influence  throughout  the  world  was  enor- 
mous. Not  only  was  it  introduced  into  all  the  countries  then 
under  French  control,  and  preserved  by  some  after  the  downfall 
of  the  Empire  (Rhenish  Prussia,  Naples,  Belgium,  Holland, 
Poland),  but  it  was  imitated  by  many  foreign  nations  or  States, 
from  Eumania  to  Bolivia  and  Louisiana.  This  success  is  due 
to  the  eclectic  and  moderate  character  of  the  Code,  in  which 
Roman  law,  common  law,  royal  decrees,  the  jurisprudence  of  the 
old  courts  of  justice,  the  doctrines  of  the  French  law  authorities, 
the  legislative  intentions  of  the  Revolution,  are  harmonized  and 
made  workable.  This  very  eclecticism  and  the  haste  with  which 
the  work  was  done  prevent  it  from  ranking  very  high  as  the 
embodiment  of  a  social  philosophy;  from  that  point  of  view,  we 
are  told,  it  is  full  of  vague  definitions  and  inconsistencies.  But 
most  historians  are  agreed  that  it  represented  a  progress  on  the 
chaotic  legislation  of  the  past  and  on  the  unsystematized,  not 
seldom  impracticable,  laws  of  the  Revolution.  For  instance,  the 
inheritance  laws,  restricting  the  liberty  of  the  testator,  may 
seem  to  us  dangerously  narrow;  but  they  were  a  compromise 
between  the  excessive  privilege  of  the  first  born,  under  the 
ancient  regime,  and  the  compulsory  division  in  equal  shares 
enacted  by  the  Revolution. 

The  Code  was  strictly  conservative — eschewing  bold  and 
untried  ideas ;  this  is  manifest  in  its  decided  "  masculinism." 
It  was  even,  in  some  respects,  reactionary:  it  restored  slavery  in 
the  French  colonies — a  wretched  policy  which  was  to  cost 
France  .San  Domingo.  The  great  principle  of  the  Revolution, 
equality  before  the  law,  was  respected  at  first;  but  in  1808 
special  dispositions  were  made  for  the  new  Imperial  nobility,  and 
the  system  of  entail  (majorat)  by  which  Napoleon  wanted  to 
make  it  a  permanent  element  in  the  structure  of  French  society. 
In  this,  as  in  so  many  other  respects,  the  Emperor  was  spoiling 
the  achievements  of  the  First  Consul.* 

•  The  other  codes :  Code  de  Procedure  and  Code  d'Instruction  Crlminelle. 
1806,  Code  de  Commerce,  1807,  Code  Penal,  1810,  are  much  less  Important 
and  proved  of  much  less  permanent  value.  The  Commercial  Code  In  par- 
ticular had  to  be  repeatedly  remodelled,  and  the  Penal  Code  was  decidedly 
reactionary. 


68     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXrn  CENTURY 

Probably  the  most  far-reaching  and  typical  part  of  Napoleon's 
reorganization  was  the  administrative  side,  the  Bureaucracy. 
France's  officialdom  became  a  grand  machine,  of  perfectly 
symmetrical  design,  and  in  which  the  minutest  wheels  received 
their  impulse  from  the  central  motive  power  in  Paris.  The  civil 
service  of  the  Kings  had  been  hampered  in  two  ways:  the 
privileges  of  provinces,  towns,  corporations,  parliaments,  nobility, 
and  clergy  often  made  the  enforcement  of  regal  law  extremely 
difficult;  and  the  central  government,  capricious  as  well  as 
despotic,  discouraged  efficiency.  The  Revolution  had  swept 
away  all  privileges,  and  even  during  the  rule  of  Terror  had  left 
some  autonomy  to  the  local  elective  assemblies.  But  these 
bodies,  ill-prepared  for  their  task,  unchecked  from  above,  failed 
in  many  cases  to  maintain  order  and  decent  government.  That 
they  were  capable  of  improvement  under  closer  supervision  of 
the  national  authorities  is  infinitely  probable :  Napoleon  preferred 
to  take  away  from  them  any  particle  of  real  influence  and  to 
vest  all  power  in  the  hands  of  his  representatives,  the  Prefects. 
The  immediate  result  was  brilliant.  Napoleon  had  in  a  high 
degree  the  gift  of  the  born  ruler:  that  of  selecting  the  right 
men,  irrespective  of  their  origin.  His  Prefects  were,  most  of 
them,  able  administrators,  and  devoted,  for  the  time  being,  to 
his  person  and  his  system.  He  kept  them  up  to  a  high  standard 
of  efficiency  by  his  own  example  of  tireless  industry  and  by  his 
constant  supervision.  Even  now,  French  "  Bureaucrats "  are 
conscientious  and  painstaking,  remarkably  honest,  and,  until 
recently,  comparatively  independent  of  political  patronage. 
But  the  huge  machine,  without  the  master  mechanic  who  put  it 
together  and  kept  it  in  perfect  trim,  is  growing  sluggish  and 
wasteful.  Initiative  is  discouraged;  routine  rules  supreme; 
mediocrity  is  a  condition  of  regular  promotion,  and  favouritism  is 
rife.  No  red-blooded  Frenchman  has  ever  come  into  personal 
contact  with  "  les  bureaux  "  without  being  temporarily  converted 
to  anarchism.  The  evils  of  the  system  are  evident.  But  it  has 
become  a  bad  habit  which  cannot  be  shaken  off.  Moreover,  it 
is  an  admirable  instrument  of  mild  and  legalized  tyranny,  which 
no  Government  is  strong  or  disinterested  enough  to  discard. 
Thus  every  successive  regime,  the  democratic  and  social 


NAPOLEON  69 

Republic  of  1848  as  well  as  the  Catholic  and  feudal  Restoration 
of  1815,  has  piously  preserved  the  legacy  of  Louis  XIV  and 
Napoleon.  At  any  rate,  this  permanent  Bureaucracy  absorbed 
the  shocks  of  repeated  revolutions,  and  gave  the  national  life  of 
France  a  continuity  that  political  history  would  not  lead  us  to 
expect. 

The  best  feature  of  Napoleonic  rule  was,  as  we  have  said, 
that  the  right  man  was  put  in  the  right  place,  irrespective  of  his 
origin :  emigre  and  regicide  were  equally  welcome  if  they  were 
willing  and  able  to  serve.  The  master  kept  his  magnificent 
promise:  "a  free  career  open  to  all  talents."  Just  as  every 
private  had  a  Marshal's  baton  in  his  knapsack,  the  humblest 
clerk  could  dream  that  he  too  some  day  would  rule  the  civil 
affairs  of  a  department  or  even  of  a  vassal  kingdom.*  The 
Empire  did  not  last  long  enough  to  mar  this  fine  beginning. 
But  Napoleon  did  not  rest  satisfied  with  his  legitimate  titles: 
the  crowned  servant  of  the  Revolution,  the  Emperor  of  Parvenus. 
He  wanted  to  reconcile  to  his  regime  the  old  aristocratic  and 
bourgeois  families,  and  with  this  end  in  view  he  promoted  their 
sons,  in  court,  diplomatic,  and  military  positions,  and  even  in  the 
civil  service,  with  scandalous  rapidity.  Thus  in  the  latter  part 
of  his  reign  the  worst  evil  of  the  eighteenth  century,  class 
privilege,  was  creeping  back. 

The  third  way  in  which  Napoleon  veiled  or  justified  his 
despotism  was  to  present  it  as  the  outcome  and  embodiment  of 
democracy.  The  word  "  Republic  "  did  not  completely  disappear 
until  1807.  There  was  the  shadow  of  a  Constitution,  a  show  of 
elections,  and  even  the  personal  authority  of  the  First  Consul 
and  of  the  Emperor  rested  on  plebiscites.  Napoleon's  power 
grew  by  degrees:  in  1799  it  was  far  from  absolute,  and  no  less 
legitimate,  after  all,  than  that  of  the  Directors  whom  he  super- 
seded. The  other  two  Provisional  Consuls  were  not  reduced  at 
first  to  absolute  impotence,  and  in  the  different  assemblies  room 
was  found  for  men  of  note  and  independence,  like  Gregoire, 
M.-J.  Chenier,  Benjamin  Constant — even  for  personal  enemies 

•  Like  Roederer  at  Naples,  Lebrun  and  d'Alphonse  In  Holland,  Beugnot 
in  the  Qrand  Duchy  of  Berg. 


70     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

of  Bonaparte.  But,  placed  as  an  arbiter  between  conflicting 
parties  and  classes,  Napoleon  played  them  off  against  each  other 
with  admirable  skill.  The  bourgeoisie  were  averse  to  direct 
universal  suffrage  and  genuine  democracy,  because  they  sincerely 
believed  that  the  people  were  not  prepared  to  rule,  and  because 
they  wished  to  preserve  their  own  social  and  economic  privileges. 
They  were  in  favour  of  a  strong  executive  because  they  were 
eager  for  material  order.  So  they  raised  no  serious  objections 
when  Napoleon  annihilated  universal  suffrage  in  fact,  whilst 
maintaining  the  name.  But  they  would  have  liked  to  retain  for 
themselves  some  political  rights,  more  than  a  semblance  of 
constitutional  government:  their  ideal  was  already  that  of  the 
bourgeois  monarchy  of  Louis-Philippe.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
people  were  indifferent  to  parliamentary  forms  in  which  they 
had  no  part.  Their  sympathies  went,  not  to  the  bourgeois 
liberals,  but  to  the  ruler  of  revolutionary  origin,  crowned  by 
victory,  confirmed  by  a  plebiscite,  and  who  represented  in  their 
eyes  patriotism  and  democracy.  Both  bourgeoisie  and  people  were 
willing  to  put  up  with  some  degree  of  dictatorial  government  as 
long  as  the  war  should  last,  and  in  order  to  prevent  a  return  to  the 
old  monarchy.  Thus,  leaning  sometimes  on  the  people,  sometimes 
on  the  conservative  elements,  always  on  the  army,  Napoleon 
suppressed  every  opposition  and  destroyed  every  remaining  check. 
There  were  four  assemblies :  a  Senate,  "  guardian  of  the 
Constitution,"  a  Council  of  State  to  elaborate  laws,  a  Tribunate 
to  discuss  them,  a  Legislative  Body  to  pass  upon  them  without 
saying  a  word.  But  all  the  members  of  these  assemblies  were 
the  Emperor's  nominees.  The  Tribunate  was  reduced  from  one 
hundred  to  fifty  members,  so  as  to  eliminate  whoever  had  shown 
any  independence;  and  in  1807  it  was  finally  suppressed, 
because  "  it  still  preserved  some  of  that  restless  and  democratic 
spirit  which  had  long  troubled  France."  The  Council  of  State 
was  a  useful  body  of  specialists  and  administrators,  but  not  a 
deliberative  assembly.  The  Legislative  Body  had  no  authority. 
The  Senate,  richly  endowed,  was  a  model  of  subserviency,  and 
even  of  servility — until  the  day  after  Napoleon's  downfall. 
With  his  Imperial  Decrees  and  his  "  Senatus  Consulte," 
Napoleon  could  legislate  without  let  or  hindrance. 


NAPOLEON  Tl 

Universal  suffrage  was  disposed  of  in  the  same  clever  manner : 
it  became  a  hollow  shell.  "  Confidence  should  be  at  the  basis  of 
the  social  pyramid/'  said  Napoleon  after  Sieves,  "  and  authority 
at  the  apex."  In  virtue  of  this  principle,  all  electors  were  to 
select  one-tenth  of  their  number:  these  names  formed  the 
communal  or  district  lists,  from  among  whom  the  district 
officials  were  appointed — by  the  central  government.  One-tenth 
of  these  first  names  formed  the  departmental  list;  one-tenth  of 
these  the  national  list,  whence  all  national  officials  were  taken. 
These  lists  were  to  be  made  once  for  all,  and  vacancies  filled  up 
at  long  intervals.  But  they  were  not  even  completed:  it  was  a 
mere  parody  of  universal  suffrage.  As  for  the  plebiscites,  they 
were  taken  on  open  registers,  without  any  check  or  guarantee. 
The  records  of  some  parishes  contain  nothing  but  the  total 
number  of  "  ayes  " ;  others  have  long  lists  of  names  all  in  the 
same  handwriting.  Anyway,  the  Consular  Constitution  was  put 
in  application  long  before  the  returns  of  the  plebiscite  were 
known. 

Thus  relieved  from  any  parliamentary  check,  Napoleon  pro- 
ceeded to  silence  every  other  possible  form  of  opposition.  All 
political  newspapers — and  the  Eevolution  had  yielded  a  plentiful 
crop  of  them — were  suppressed  except  thirteen,  and  even  these 
could  be  suspended  or  snuffed  out  of  existence  at  will.  Madame 
de  Stael  was  kept  exiled  from  her  beloved  "  ruisseau  de  la  rue  du 
Bac  "  *  for  the  crime  of  having  some  social  influence,  and  her 
book  on  Germany  was  confiscated  and  destroyed  without  any 
explanation.  After  Wagram,  the  Emperor  ordered  Fouche  to 
take  the  sons  of  the  ten  most  prominent  families  in  each  depart- 
ment and  train  them  for  the  army.  "  If  they  protest,"  he  added, 
"  answer  that  such  is  my  pleasure."  Eight  State  prisons  were 
created  "  for  criminals  who  did  not  fall  under  any  definite  article 
of  the  law,  or  whose  trial  would  be  dangerous  for  the  State,  or 
whom  it  was  desirable  to  save  from  the  death  penalty  out  of 
consideration  for  their  families."  This  amounted  to  the  restora- 
tion of  the  Bastille  and  the  "  lettres  de  cachet."  t  The  murder 
of  the  Duke  of  Enghien,  captured  in  neutral  territory,  and 

•  The  gutter  of  Perry  Street 

t  Arbitrary  warrant  of  Imprisonment. 


72     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

shot  with  the  scantiest  apology  for  a  trial,  is  the  best  known, 
but  not  the  worst,  of  Napoleon's  high-handed  deeds.* 

We  have  dwelt  at  some  length  on  the  military,  administrative, 
and  political  activities  of  Napoleon,  because  they  had  on  the 
whole  of  French,  and  even  of  European,  civilization  a  baleful 
influence  which  is  not  yet  spent.  Not  only  is  he  in  a  large 
degree  responsible  for  the  slaughter  of  three  million  young  men 
whose  death  left  Europe  permanently  weakened;  not  only  did 
he  create,  or  at  least  revive,  modernize,  and  strengthen,  a  tradi- 
tion of  anti-liberal,  compressive  government  which  even  the 
present  Eepublic  is  not  able  to  shake  off;  but  he  fostered 
throughout  Europe  a  spirit  of  violence,  a  feeling  of  international 
diffidence  and  hatred,  which  has  not  yet  been  dispelled.  If 
Germany,  for  instance,  has  not  always  been  true  to  the  highest 
ideals  of  her  own  poets  and  philosophers,  the  fault  lies  chiefly 
with  Louis  XIV  and  Napoleon  the  Great. 

§  3.  SOCIETY  AND  CULTURE  UNDER  NAPOLEON. 

(a)  Society. — Settling  down  after  the  Directoire — The  Consular 
Court — The  Imperial  Court — The  new  nobility — The  old  nobility — 
The  Austrian  marriage — Growing  disaffection  in  all  classes. 

Material  prosperity — Great  public  works — Agriculture  in  progress 
— Industry  and  commerce  encouraged — Disastrous  effect  of  the  Con- 
tinental Blockade. 

(b)  Culture. — Transitional — "Pompadour  culture"  dying  out — 
Sciences  extremely  brilliant — Popular  literature. 

The  Epigoni  of  classicism — Greco-Roman  revival — Dullness  of 
literature — Stiffness  of  art — Insignificance  of  thought. 

The  dawn  of  romanticism — Medisevalism  and  the  "  Troubadour 
Style  " — Influence  of  foreign  literatures — Melancholy — Religiosity — 
The  army  as  a  school  of  picturesqueness — Romantic  elements  in 
Napoleon  himself. 

(a)  Society. 

Social  life  in  France  suffered  a  total  eclipse  during  the  fateful 
months  of  the  Terror.  But  immediately  after  the  fall  of  Robes- 
pierre it  resumed  its  former  activity.  Yet  a  great  change  has 
come  over  it.  The  exquisite  aristocracy  of  the  old  regime  had 
disappeared.  Many  were  dead,  others  in  concealment,  the  rest 

•  Cf.  his  dealings  with  the  Pope  and  with  the  Royal  Family  of  Spain. 


NAPOLEON  73 

scattered  abroad.  Their  places  were  filled  by  the  unscrupulous 
gang  that  economic  upheavals  always  bring  to  the  fore:  army 
contractors,  stockjobbers,  land  speculators,  "  rotten "  poli- 
ticians,* all  eager  to  enjoy  their  newly-gotten  wealth.  The 
Thermidorian  reaction  and  the  Directoire  rank  with  the  English 
Restoration,  the  French  Regency,  and  the  Second  Empire  among 
the  periods  of  cynical  pleasure-seeking  and  gilded  corruption. 
By  1800,  when  Bonaparte  assumed  control,  the  shudder  of  '93 
was  a  thing  of  the  past,  the  fever  for  instant  enjoyment  had 
abated,  and  it  was  a  comparatively  easy  task  to  restore  normal 
conditions. 

The  First  Consul  took  up  his  abode  at  the  royal  palace  of  the 
Tuileries,  and  his  circle,  "  although  not  yet  a  Court,  was  no 
longer  a  camp/'  Josephine  did  not  turn  into  a  respectable 
matron,  as  would  have  become  her  years  and  position;  but  her 
conduct  no  longer  was  an  open  scandal,  as  in  the  days  of  her 
widowhood  or  during  Napoleon's  absence  in  Italy  and  Egypt. 
Her  frail  Creole  beauty  was  already  fading,  but  she  had  retained 
through  all  her  adventures  the  tact  and  charm  of  her  class,  and 
her  heart  had  still  the  degree  of  easy  kindness  that  utter 
frivolity  will  allow.  Bonaparte,  just  turned  thirty,  would  show 
at  times  the  playfulness  of  a  boy.  His  old  comrades  still 
addressed  him  familiarly.  So  there  were  days  of  genuine  and 
decent  enjoyment  at  the  Tuileries,  and  especially  at  the  country 
seat  at  Malmaison. 

But  with  every  step  towards  the  Empire  the  official  circle 
grew  more  like  a  Court,  and  it  soon  became  Napoleon's  desire 
to  rival  the  magnificence  and  etiquette  of  Versailles  under 
Louis  XIV.  An  elaborate  ceremonial  was  devised,  which  the 
Emperor  superintended  with  minutest  care:  but,  in  fits  of 
uncontrollable  impatience,  he  often  upset  at  the  last  moment 
the  most  painstaking  arrangements.  The  absorbed  silence  of 
the  Master,  his  feverish  haste — which  left  his  guests  half -starving 
— his  sudden  outbursts  of  soldier-like  brutality,  even  with 
women,  chilled  any  attempt  at  easy  badinage  or  free  interplay 
of  fancy.  Even  Louis  XIV,  sun-god  though  he  was,  remained 
at  Versailles  a  gentleman  entertaining  friends:  Napoleon's 
*  Cf.  Barras.  "  roi  dea  pourris." 


74     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

courtiers  at  the  Tuileries,  Saint- Cloud,  or  Compiegne  would 
often  be  reminded  that  they  were  in  the  lion's  lair.  The 
theatrical  costumes  of  civil  officials,  the  glittering  uniforms  of 
the  military,  the  massive  furniture  after  Roman  patterns,  the 
heavy  classical  ornaments  of  the  newly  decorated  halls,  every- 
thing contributed  to  enhance  the  impression  of  splendour  without 
taste,  grandeur  without  cheer,  and  unfathomable  ennui. 

Napoleon  brought  forcibly  together  incompatible  elements:  a 
new  nobility  of  soldiers,  politicians,  and  officials,  and  all  the 
representatives  of  the  old  aristocracy  that  he  could  coax,  bribe, 
or  coerce  into  his  service.  The  former  Jacobins  and  the  old 
Marquises  had  one  another  in  cordial  contempt.  It  took  three- 
quarters  of  a  century  for  these  two  classes  to  amalgamate. 
Napoleon  had  dubbed  his  lieutenants  Marshals  of  France — an 
appropriate  reward.  But  he  also  invented  for  his  family  and 
the  most  prominent  of  his  civil  collaborators  magnificent  and 
meaningless  dignities.  Joseph  was  Grand  Elector;  Cambac6res, 
Arch-Chancellor;  Lebrun,  Arch-Treasurer,  and,  not  without 
some  conscious  irony,  the  sickly  and  scholarly  Louis  Bonaparte 
was  made  Grand  Constable,  and  Murat,  the  dashing  horseman, 
Grand  Admiral.  Dignitaries,  Marshals,  Ministers,  Senators, 
and  even  the  mayors  of  important  cities,  received  high-sounding 
titles,  from  Prince  down  to  Baron.  Napoleon  tried  to  make 
this  newfangled  nobility  permanent  by  a  system  of  entail 
(majorat)  that  would  perpetuate  great  estates  in  their  hands. 
This  nobiliary  system  has  been  sharply  criticized.  It  was  mani- 
festly contrary  to  the  principles  of  the  Revolution.  Yet  con- 
ditions were  not  the  same  as  in  America.  It  was  manifestly 
impossible  as  well  as  undesirable  to  blot  out  centuries  of  French 
traditions,  recorded  in  the  names  of  the  ancient  aristocracy.  If 
a  nobility  be  preserved  at  all,  it  should  be,  as  in  England,  ever 
open  to  brilliant  merit.  But  in  England  the  accession  of  new 
elements  is  gradual;  only  a  few  peers  are  created  at  a  time,  and 
never  without  presenting  guarantees  that  they  are  gentlemen.  In 
France  the  sudden  influx  of  Princes  and  Dukes,  some  of  them 
risen  from  the  lowest  classes,  and  with  no  education  but  that  of 
the  camps,  could  not  fail  to  bring  about  strange  and  ludicrous 
results.  Sardou  has  exhausted  the  farcical  possibilities  of  the 


NAPOLEON  75 

theme  in  his  clever  drama,  Madame  Bans-Gene:  the  wife  of 
Marshal  Lefebvre,  Duke  of  Danzig,  she  was  a  worthy  laundress 
by  training,  and  irremediably  vulgar;  but  her  new  dignity  did 
not  rob  her  of  popular  common  sense,  mother- wit,  and  courage. 
Socially,  the  new  courtiers  had  everything  to  learn;  Napoleon 
tried  to  have  them  drilled  by  Madame  Campan,  a  former  servant 
of  Marie- Antoinette,  who  was  keeping  a  fashionable  school  for 
young  ladies.  The  Napoleonic  nobles  remained  parvenus  for  a 
long  time.  Even  at  present  their  descendants,  like  Messrs. 
Davout,  Duke  of  Auerstaedt,  or  Lannes  de  Montebello,  are 
prouder  of  their  plain  historic  names  than  of  their  gaudy  titles 
in  partibus  infidelium. 

The  revolutionary  and  military  element  was  only  one  part  of 
the  new  Court.  Napoleon  tried  to  win  over  survivors  of  the  old 
nobility,  and  he  succeeded  in  a  way  which  that  proud  class,  after 
1815,  would  fain  have  forgotten.  The  "  Usurper  "  was  served 
by  La  Feuillade,  Montmorency,  Brancas,  Gontaut,  Gramont, 
Colbert,  Turenne,  Choiseul,  without  mentioning  the  notorious 
Talleyrand,  and  many  other  authentic  aristocrats  of  the  very 
highest  rank.  He  treated  them  in  petto,  and  not  seldom  openly, 
with  the  contempt  that  their  combined  servility  and  haughtiness 
so  richly  deserved.  "  Only  people  of  that  sort  know  how  to 
serve,"  he  said.  They  served,  but  they  neither  loved  nor 
respected.  And  compelled  to  associate  with  heroic  and  vulgar 
dukes  and  their  impossible  duchesses,  they  sought  revenge  in 
imperceptible  ironies  and  courtly  epigrams,  in  which  Talleyrand 
was  passed  master. 

Napoleon's  hankering  after  the  old  order  grew  ever  stronger. 
His  union  with  Josephine,  a  notorious  adventuress  of  the  petty 
nobility,  was  a  brilliant  match  for  him  when  he  was  naught  but 
a  struggling  young  officer.  But  it  was  now  the  last  link  with 
his  shady  and  revolutionary  past.  He  severed  it,  and  married 
an  Austrian  Archduchess,  Marie-Louise.  The  political  advan- 
tages which  the  Imperial  George  Dandin  expected  from  such 
an  alliance  proved  illusory.  His  young  wife,  whom  he  loved, 
did  not  love  him  in  return.  The  people  saw  with  regret  the 
doom  of  poor  Josephine,  gracious  in  spite  of  all  her  frailties. 
She  became  a  symbol;  a  legend  grew  round  her;  it  seemed 


76     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

as  though  the  Revolution  and  the  golden  time  of  the  Consulate 
were  receding  beyond  recall  when  the  companion  of  Bonaparte's 
halcyon  days  retired  to  Malmaison;  until  comparatively  recent 
years,  Josephine  remained  popular  in  France.*  But  Napoleon 
gained  the  inestimable  advantage  of  being  able  to  refer  to 
Louis  XVI  as  "  my  uncle." 

Although  the  Emperor  had  secured  the  temporary  and  nominal 
adhesion  of  some  illustrious  families,  many  were  the  noblemen 
who  remained  irreconcilable.  Numerous  emigres  did  not 
return  until  1814,  with  their  Princes.  Others  preserved  in 
their  country  domains,  or  in  their  residences  of  the  Faubourg, 
an  attitude  of  enforced  neutrality.  The  best  representatives 
perhaps  of  sane,  liberal,  and  patriotic  ideas,  Lafayette,  broadest- 
minded  of  aristocrats,  and  Carnot,  most  moderate  of  Terrorists, 
stood  aloof  from  a  regime  which  had  become  frankly  despotic. 
The  upper  middle  class  in  the  cities  were,  as  a  rule,  fascinated 
rather  than  conquered;  the  lower  middle  class  and  the  people 
did  not  miss  political  liberty  in  the  same  way,  and  were  more 
dazzled  by  the  material  success  of  the  Empire:  yet  their  sup- 
port was  not  unanimous  and  whole-hearted.  In  1814  the 
hostility  in  certain  parts  of  the  West  and  the  South  was  intense. 
This  disaffection  was  due  chiefly  to  the  curse  of  conscription; 
in  1811  there  were  80,000  defaulting  recruits,  whom  the 
"  infernal  columns "  hunted  down  with  relentless  severity. 
Something  of  Napoleon's  shameful  treatment  of  the  Pope  was 
known  among  the  French  peasantry,  although  the  Imperial 
censorship  suppressed  or  coloured  any  news  that  bore  on  that 
subject.  The  immense  popularity  of  the  Emperor  is  a  posthu- 
mous legend. 

Napoleon  hoped  that  material  prosperity  would  be  his  main- 
stay. Civil  war  came  to  an  end  early  in  1800,  thanks  to 
Hoche's  lieutenant  and  successor,  Hedouville.  Brigandage, 
although  never  absolutely  suppressed,  was  held  in  check  and 
disappeared  almost  everywhere.  The  magnificent  system  of 
royal  roads,  which  had  gone  to  ruin  under  the  Eepublic, 
was  rapidly  restored;  great  public  works,  canals  and  bridges, 

•  It  seems  that  the  animosity  against  Napoleon  III  has  been  harmful  to 
the  popularity  of  his  grandmother. 


NAPOLEON  77 

were  undertaken  everywhere.*  The  transfer  of  property  to  the 
peasants  themselves,  and  the  suppression  of  vexatious  privileges, 
had  renovated  France;  taxation,  so  unjust,  chaotic,  and  loosely 
collected  before  the  Revolution,  now  seemed  wonderfully  equit- 
able and  light.  So  the  progress  of  agriculture  was  striking. 
Industry  and  commerce  were  encouraged.  The  efficient  manage- 
ment of  the  Treasury,  the  creation  of  the  Bank  of  France,  gave 
financial  stability.  Richard  Lenoir,  Philippe  de  Girard,  Ober- 
kampf,  Jacquard,  among  inventors  and  captains  of  industry, 
received  moral  or  material  support  from  the  Government. 
Unfortunately,  the  grandiose  and  mad  policy  of  the  Continental 
Blockade  entailed  heavy  sacrifices.  France  and  her  satellites 
were  closed  against  English  and  colonial  goods.  A  system  of 
licensed  smuggling  had  to  be  introduced  to  mitigate  the  hard- 
ships of  total  exclusion;  but  in  spite  of  that,  many  products 
reached  fabulous  prices,  and  France  had  lost  her  best  customer. 
Coffee  and  cane  sugar  became  rarities.  Many  substitutes  were 
offered  for  the  former,  and  the  beetroot  industry  was  created — 
a  permanent  acquisition.  It  must  be  said  that  many  parts  of 
France  did  not  suffer  so  heavily  from  this  rabid  protection  as 
did  the  maritime  regions,  and  especially  Holland,  which  was 
reduced  to  bankruptcy.  On  the  whole,  there  is  no  doubt  that 
France  was  then  more  prosperous  than  she  had  been  for  ages, 
and  some  at  least  of  the  credit  was  due  to  the  Government. 
Whether  this  material  prosperity  was  not  purchased  at  too 
high  a  cost  is  another  question. 

(b)   Culture. 

From  the  point  of  view  of  culture,  the  Empire  is  a  tran- 
sitional period,  without  any  definite  characteristics  of  its  own. 
The  Epigoni  of  classicism  and  the  forerunners  of  roman- 
ticism are  found  side  by  side,  and  in  many  instances  the  two 
influences  are  seen,  combined  or  conflicting,  in  the  same  indi- 
vidual. The  spirit  of  the  age  might  be  adequately  symbolized 

•  E.g.  the  Ourcq  and  Saint  Quentin  Canals,  the  Bordeaux  bridge,  the 
Simplon  road,  etc.  The  transformation  was  even  more  striking  in  coun- 
tries temporarily  annexed  to  France ;  wonderful  activity  was  displayed,  for 
instance,  in  Illyria  and  Dalmatla. 


78     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

in  Chateaubriand's  country  seat,  "  la  Vallee  aux  Loups " ;  to 
a  modest  brick  cottage  the  great  artist  prefixed  a  portico  sup- 
ported by  two  columns  of  black  marble  and  two  caryatides  of 
white  marble,  "  For,"  he  said,  "  I  remembered  I  had  passed 
through  Athens."  He  wanted  to  add  a  tower  at  one  end  of  the 
pavilion,  but  had  to  be  satisfied  with  "  simulated  battlements  " 
on  the  outer  wall.  "I  was  thus  anticipating  the  craze  for 
the  Middle  Ages  which  is  at  present  making  fools  of  us  all."  * 
The  incongruity  of  the  scheme  does  not  seem  to  strike  him 
at  all. 

One  thing,  it  is  plain,  had  vanished  beyond  recall:  the 
exquisite  immorality  redeemed  by  perfect  taste  and  intellectual 
daring,  in  which  Voltaire,  for  instance,  was  steeped.  For  good 
and  evil,  that  had  been  a  unique  period,  intensely  modern  and 
thoroughly  French.  We  find  it  expressed  in  the  vivacious  con- 
versations of  the  salons  and  petits  soupers ;  in  the  elegant  private 
residences  which  are  still  pastiched  all  over  the  world;  in  the 
paintings  of  Fragonard,  Boucher,  and  Watteau ;  in  the  furniture 
and  ornaments  designed  by  Gouthieres,  Oppenord,  Caffieri, 
Martin,  Riesener.  After  the  stiff  majesty  of  Louis  XIV  at 
his  zenith;  after  the  gloomy  hypocrisy  of  his  decline;  before 
the  maudlinism  and  bathos  for  which  Rousseau  and  Diderot 
were  partly  responsible;  before  the  return  to  antiquity  which 
marked  the  last  quarter  of  the  century — there  was  a  charming 
and  wicked  moment,  a  world  which  had  brought  the  art  of 
sensuous  enjoyment  to  its  perfection  and  was  going  to  ruin 
with  a  smile.  For  that  age  the  term  "  Pompadour  culture " 
has  been  suggested.  Its  art,  now  prized  so  highly,  its  thought, 
wonderfully  clear  and  brilliant  within  narrow  limits,  were  held 
in  the  utmost  contempt  by  the  new  generation.  Hardly  any 
survivors  of  that  time  were  left  in  France ;  t  a  number,  living 
abroad,  had  given  France  an  undying  fame  for  frivolous 
elegance.  Chateaubriand  met  a  few  of  these  amiable  fossils, 
like  Saint-Lambert  and  Madame  d'Houdetot,  the  Philemon  and 
Baucis  of  unlawful  love.  The  sins  of  that  time  are  still  with 
us;  they  are  eternal.  But  the  culture  which  gave  them  the 

•  M emoirea,  ed.  Birt,  ill.  8-7. 

t  Cf.,  however,  da  BouflBers,  1738-1816. 


NAPOLEON  79 

glamour  of  exquisite  elegance  is  a  closed  chapter  in  European 
history.* 

In  one  respect,  on  the  contrary,  the  culture  of  the  Empire 
continues  that  of  the  preceding  age,  without  interruption,  with- 
out decadence,  even  with  increased  brilliancy:  it  is  in  the 
scientific  domain.  In  1794  Condorcet  was  executed  because 
he  was  a  Girondist,  and  Lavoisier  because  he  was  a  tax-con- 
tractor (fermier-general).  Coffinhal  is  reported  to  have  said: 
"  The  Republic  has  no  need  of  scientists."  But  these  were 
exceptions,  and  the  monstrous  sally  of  Coffinhal  was  contrary 
to  the  principles  and  practice  of  the  Convention.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  the  Revolution  and  the  Empire  honoured  scientists, 
\vho,  in  their  turn,  served  the  country  in  every  capacity,  as 
investigators,  as  technical  advisers  in  military  and  industrial 
matters,  as  teachers,  and  even  as  administrators.  Scientists, 
who  do  not  live  in  the  past,  showed  little  regret  for  the  ancient 
regime.  As  a  rule  they  were  not  averse  to  an  "  enlightened 
tyranny."  They  appreciated  a  "  tyrant "  who  understood  them 
and  took  pride  in  calling  himself  one  of  them;  Bonaparte  was 
a  member  of  the  scientific  section  of  the  Institute  of  France, t 
and  took  a  large  body  of  scientists  with  him  in  his  Egyptian 
expedition.  Many  famous  men  have  been  accused  of  servility 
in  their  relations  with  Napoleon;  the  decadence  of  literature, 
the  silence  imposed  upon  the  political  and  social  world,  brought 
the  favour  enjoyed  by  science  into  bolder  relief.  But  it  brought 
out  also  the  brilliancy  of  its  achievements.  Then  lived  and 
worked  Lagrange,  Laplace,  Legendre,  Lalande,  among  mathe- 
maticians; Gay-Lussac,  Monge,  Arago,  Thenard,  Guiton  de 
Morveau,  Berthollet,  Fourcroy,  Vauquelin,  among  physicists 
and  chemists;  Lacepede,  Lamarck,  Geoffroy-Saint-Hilaire, 
Cuvier,  _  among  natural  philosophers ;  Broussais,  Corvisart, 
Laennec  among  physicians;  Larrey  and  Dupuytren  among 
surgeons.  Carnot,  who  was  a  great  mathematician  as  well  as 
a  military  engineer  and  the  renovator  of  modern  tactics,  lived 

*  In  European,  not  exclusively  In  French  history ;  for  the  Pompadour 
culture  was  that  of  all  aristocracies  about  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth 
century. 

t  Equivalent  to  the  former,  and  present,  Academy  of  Sciences, 


80     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXra  CENTURY 

in  retirement;  but  practically  all  the  others  held  the  highest 
positions  as  directors  of  important  departments,  inspectors, 
senators.  Lacepede  was  President  of  the  Senate,  Cuvier  was 
Councillor  of  State.  Napoleon  encouraged  foreign  scientists  as 
well,  not  only  those  who,  like  Volta,  were  his  Italian  subjects 
or  the  subjects  of  his  allies,  but  even  enemies;  a  prize  of  sixty 
thousand  francs  was  presented  to  Humphry  Davy  in  1807. 
In  many  respects  this  was  the  golden  age  of  French  science. 

We  need  hardly  say  that  neither  pseudo-classicism  nor 
incipient  romanticism  gives  a  true  idea  of  the  life  and  taste 
of  the  average  Frenchman  under  the  Empire.  The  broadly 
Gallic  romances  and  farces  of  Pigault-Lebrun,  which  are  still 
read  in  French  barracks,  are  more  typical  than  Atala  and 
Rene;  the  melodramas  of  Pixerecourt  and  Duval,  which  are 
interesting  links  in  the  history  of  the  French  stage,  were 
immensely  popular.  The  songs  of  Desaugiers  are  bright  and 
racy,  perhaps  truer  to  type,  as  Professor  Babbitt  would  say,  than 
the  more  famous  ones  of  Beranger,  whose  career  began  under 
the  Empire.  Perhaps  the  most  pleasing  and  truest  documents 
would  be  the  paintings  and  coloured  prints  of  Boilly,*  and  the 
comedies  of  Picard.  These  are  wholesome  and  entertaining 
productions,  cleverly  though  simply  constructed,  without  any 
pretension  to  philosophy  and  style,  but  full  of  easy  wit.  truthful 
observation,  and  common  sense.  Picard  is  a  dramatist  of  the 
same  class  as  Dancourt  and  Labiche,  far  superior  to  the  cleverer 
but  less  sincere  playwrights  of  the  Scribe-Sardou  type.  His 
Provincial  Town,  for  instance,  well  repays  perusal. 

But  in  the  upper  spheres  classicism  still  held  sway,  and  that 
classicism  was  decidedly  more  classical  than  at  the  time  of 
Boileau.  During  the  closing  years  of  Louis  XV  there  had 
been  a  movement  of  return  to  antiquity,  which  continued 
throughout  the  reign  of  Louis  XVI  and  became  irresistible 
under  the  Republic  and  the  Empire.  Of  this  tendency,  Saint 
Genevieve's  Church  (the  Pantheon),  by  .Soufflot,  is  an  early  sign. 
The  painters  Vien  and  David  had  routed  the  pupils  of  Watteau 
and  Boucher  before  the  Revolution  broke  out.  Under  the  Con- 
vention, Roman  simplicity,  Roman  patriotism,  Roman  civic 
•  Also  the  portraits  of  Icabay. 


NAPOLEON  81 

virtue  were  the  order  of  the  day,  and  the  names  of  Greek  and 
Roman  heroes  took  the  place  of  the  banished  saints;  the  fore- 
runner of  socialism  called  himself  Caius  Gracchus  Babceuf. 
Under  the  Consulate,  everything  Roman  was  deliberately  pas- 
tiched;  the  political  terms — Consul,  Emperor,  Senator,  Tribune 
— show  the  trend  of  thought.  Costumes  and  furniture  bore  the 
same  mark.  Architecture  especially  showed  Roman  influences, 
not  only  in  the  triumphal  monuments  already  alluded  to,  but 
in  office  buildings  and  in  private  residences.*  The  art  critics 
of  the  time  went  so  far  as  to  deride  the  work  of  seventeenth- 
century  architects  as  "  barbarously  modern  "  and  "  not  in  con- 
formity with  the  eternal  models  of  antiquity."  t  In  literature, 
Laharpe's  Lycee  was  the  standard  authority,  and  Geoffrey  was 
the  growling  guardian  of  dramatic  traditions.  The  tragedies  of 
M.-J.  Chenier,  Baour-Lormian,  Arnault,  Brifaut,  Laharpe, 
Legouve,  Luce  de  Lancival,  were  models  of  insignificance; 
lack  of  genius,  timidity  of  taste,  and  a  rigorous  censorship  con- 
tributed to  maintain  that  dead-level  of  mediocrity.  Epic  poetry 
on  a  monumental  scale  was  abundant;  for  whatever  faults 
Imperial  literature  may  have  had,  improductivity  and  lack  of 
ambition  were  not  among  them.  But  in  spite  of  official 
encouragement,  neither  epic  nor  heroic  poetry  would  flourish 
in  those  epic  and  heroic  times.  The  old  "  Pindar "  Lebrun, 
who  sang  mechanically  one  regime  after  another,  was  still  an 
easy  first.  The  most  typical,  most  successful  kind  of  literature 
during  a  period  when  most  of  literature  was  devitalized  was 
"  descriptive  poetry,"  sometimes  humorous,  mostly  didactic. 
The  veteran  Abbe  Delille  was  considered  the  greatest  poet  of 
recent  times — a  skilful  versifier,  he  was  not  without  merit  in 
his  craft,  and  unrivalled  in  the  art  of  describing  ingeniously  the 
commonest  objects  without  ever  using  the  proper  term.  In 
philosophy,  the  last  "  Sensualists " — or  rather  Sensationists — 
the  last  disciples  of  Condillac,  Destutt  de  Tracy,  Morellet, 
Garat,  Volney,  Laromiguiere,  even  Degerando  and  Cabanis,  con- 
tinued the  tradition  of  the  Encyclopedists,  not  unworthily.  But 

•  E.g.,  extension  of  the  Palais-Bourbon  for  *he  Legislative  Body,  Palaces 
of  the  Qua!  d'Orsay,  Exchange,  etc. 
t  Saint- Victor,  Tableau  de  Paris. 


82     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

their  political  independence  had  called  upon  them  the  hostility  of 
the  Master,  who  made  the  word  "  ideologist "  a  term  of  contempt. 

These  Epigoni  of  the  classical  age  were  of  widely  different 
merit.  In  literature  they  are  past  redemption.  In  philosophy 
they  are  undistinguished.  In  architecture,  some  of  the  build- 
ings begun  under  Napoleon  had  a  certain  appropriate  majesty; 
Chalgrin's  triumphal  arch  is  better  than  any  of  its  Eoman 
models,  whilst  the  work  of  Percier  and  Fontaine  was  not  devoid 
of  elegance.  In  painting  David  is  a  great  master  in  spite  of  his 
ultra-classical  bend,  and  as  the  official  painter  of  Napoleon  he 
left  us  some  admirable  compositions.*  The  furniture  and 
costumes  were  not  beautiful  in  themselves:  but  they  have  a 
distinctive  style,  the  last  style  modern  France  has  known.  So 
there  is  some  justification  for  their  repeated  revivals  of  favour. 

"  The  dusk  of  the  old  order  fought  with  the  dawn  of  the  new," 
if  we  may  borrow  from  M.  Merlet  one  of  his  characteristic 
phrases.  The  Romantic  revolution  was  not  to  break  out,  in 
France,  until  1820 :  but  it  had  been  under  way  for  wellnigh 
half  a  century.  One  of  its  essential  elements  was  the  return 
to  the  Middle  Ages,  those  centuries  of  chivalry  and  faith  con- 
temptuously ignored  by  Boileau.  But  Voltaire  in  his  Zaire,  in 
his  Tancrede,  had  already  gone  back  to  the  times  of  the 
Crusaders,  the  knights,  the  tournaments.  Under  the  Empire, 
in  spite  of  the  predominance  of  classicism,  the  germ  had  deve- 
loped. Creuze  de  Lesser  paraphrased  the  Romancero  and  wrote 
an  immense  medley — some  fifty  thousand  lines! — on  chivalry. 
About  1810,  d'Arlincourt  and  de  Marchangy  began  to  popularize 
mediaeval  lore.  Michaud  commenced  his  History  of  the  Crusades. 
Eaynouard  was  rediscovering  Provengal  literature,  and  in  his 
enthusiasm  ascribed  to  it  an  influence  it  never  had.  For  this 
Pre-Romantic  love  of  the  mediaeval  has  been  coined  the  expres- 
sion "  Troubadour  style,"  which  connotes  false  heroism,  silly 
sentimentality,  incongruous  local  colouring,  combined  with  the 
insipid  elegance  of  pseudo-classicism.  Of  this,  the  song  "  Partant 
pour  la  Syrie  "  t  is  perhaps  the  most  perfect  type.  It  is  easy  to  be 

•  Especially  the  famous  "  Coronation." 

t  With  music  by  Queen  Horlenae.  Almost  a  national  anthem  under 
Napoleon  III. 


NAPOLEON  83 

severe  with  these  first  attempts.  But  it  was  under  such  influences 
that  Hugo,  Thierry,  Michelet  were  brought  up. 

A  second  element  we  shall  find  in  romanticism  is  "  concrete 
cosmopolitanism  " — the  knowledge  and  appreciation  of  foreign 
literature,  as  opposed  to  the  abstract  universalism  of  the  classics. 
This  was  already  well  developed.  Letourneur,  Ducis,  under 
the  ancient  regime,  had  translated  or  adapted  Shakespeare. 
Ossianism  was  a  craze,  and  almost  a  disease,  which  did  not 
spare  Napoleon  himself.  Delille  published  a  version  of  Para- 
dise Lost.  Klopstock,  Gessner  were  already  known;  Schiller 
was  given  the  title  of  French  citizen,  and  Benjamin  Constant 
translated  his  Wallenstein.  Creuze  de  Lesser,  Raynouard  were 
calling  attention  to  the  earliest  monuments  of  the  Southern 
literatures;  Sismondi,  to  the  history  of  the  Italian  republics. 
And  it  was  in  1810  that  Madame  de  Stae'l  attempted  to  publish 
her  epoch-making  work  on  Germany,  which  was  suppressed  by 
the  Imperial  police. 

Melancholy  is  another  Romantic  trait.  The  wide  popularity 
enjoyed  by  Young's  Night  Thoughts,  Rousseau's  Nouvelle 
Helo'ise  and  Goethe's  Werther  before  the  Revolution  shows  that 
the  frivolity  and  also  the  sanity  of  the  classical  age  were  already 
on  the  wane.  Byronism  was  full-blown  in  Chateaubriand's  Rene 
(1802)  when  Byron  was  a  mere  schoolboy.  Nor  was  Chateau- 
briand alone.  Bernarclin  de  Saint-Pierre  was  still  alive,  a  link 
between  Rousseauism  and  romanticism  proper.  His  brother- 
in-law,  Cousin  de  Grainville,  wrote  a  sombre  prose  epic,  The 
Last  Man,  full  of  magnificent  passages;  then,  appropriately 
enough,  he  committed  suicide.  The  elegies  of  the  time  are  far 
superior  to  the  odes,  epics,  descriptive  or  didactic  poems,  and 
tragedies.  It  was  his  dreaminess  and  melancholy  that  com- 
mended Ossian  to  the  French  public.  Millevoye,  Chenedolle 
are  worthy  precursors  of  Lamartine.  Even  Fontanes,  most 
frigid  of  official  versifiers,  found  inspiration  in  All  Souls'  Day, 
and  Parny,  among  his  licentious  erotic  pieces  or  his  anti- 
Christian  mock-heroics,  has  passages  full  of  tender  sadness. 
Senancour's  Obermann  (1804)  is  particularly  typical;  solitude, 
melancholy,  religiosity  without  religion,  incessant  brooding  that 
paralyses  action,  all  the  elements  of  the  famous  "  disease  of  the 


84     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

century "  are  found  in  that  book,  in  the  early  dawn  of  the 
Empire. 

A  reaction  against  intellectualism  and  abstract  logic,  a  return 
to  sentiment  and  faith  on  the  one  hand,  to  tradition  and 
authority  on  the  other;  a  will  to  believe  and  even  to  make- 
believe — in  a  word,  a  revival  of  Catholicism  under  many  different 
aspects,  was  also  characteristic  of  the  period.  Of  this  revival, 
Royer-Collard,  Maine  de  Biran,  de  Bonald,  and  especially  de 
Maistre  and  Chateaubriand  were  the  leaders.  This  tendency 
did  not  bear  all  its  fruit  until  after  the  Eestoration,  which  it 
prepared;  but  its  beginning  with  the  accession  of  Bonaparte  in 
1800  and  its  growth  throughout  the  Consulate  and  the  Empire 
are  unmistakable. 

Finally,  whilst  that  age  of  brutal  energy  and  picturesque 
achievements,  that  "  age  of  ancestors  "  which  shaped  the  world 
anew,  was  apparently  satisfied  with  the  canons  of  an  obsolete 
tradition,  the  romantic  glamour  of  real  life  could  not  fail  to 
influence  its  art  and  literature  in  spite  of  all  classical  prejudices. 
Even  David  could  not  help  putting  colour  and  movement  in  his 
modern  scenes — the  "  Coronation,"  the  "  Distribution  of  Eagles," 
etc. ;  and  his  pupils,  Gerard,  Gros,  went  even  farther  in  that  direc- 
tion. Gros,  in  particular,  in  his  "  Plague  at  Joppa,"  in  his  "  Battle 
of  Aboukir,"  in  his  "Battle  of  Eylau,"  shows  all  the  qualities 
which  the  romanticists  will  later  on  prize  so  highly;  and  it 
was  under  the  Empire,  in  military  subjects,  that  Gericault  began 
his  career.  The  new  Cassar  was  fast  supplanting  Greek  and 
Roman  heroes  as  the  centre  of  an  epic  cycle.  Napoleon  himself, 
in  spite  of  his  Italian  ancestry,  his  classical  features,  his  Roman 
aspirations,  and  the  practical  character  of  much  of  his  work,  was 
in  certain  respects  a  romanticist.  The  contrasts  and  dangers  of 
his  adventurous  career ;  his  constant  hankering  after  the  elusive 
and  gorgeous  East ;  his  fatalism  and  superstition ;  the  gloom  and 
isolation  of  omnipotence:  all  these  were  either  the  signs  or  the 
causes  of  a  Romantic  turn  of  mind.  And  this  would  find 
expression  in  his  love  for  Ossian,  or  better  in  sudden  outbursts 
of  unacademic  eloquence,  which  give  him  a  brilliant  place  in 
French  literature. 

The    character   of   the    Imperial   period    is    therefore   more 


NAPOLEON  85 

complex  than  is  generally  thought.  The  personality  of  Napoleon, 
his  incessant  wars,  his  immense  work  of  reconstruction,  his 
ever-growing  tyranny,  fill  the  centre  of  the  stage.  The  graces 
of  the  old  world  are  dead,  but  its  conventionalities,  in  the  form 
of  pseudo-classicism,  are  more  oppressive  than  ever.  Genius  is 
in  exile  or  in  opposition.  Thus  the  first  impression  is  one  of 
artificiality  and  tedium.  But,  even  apart  from  the  absorbing 
personality  of  the  Emperor,  there  are  redeeming  features  in  this 
period  of  fifteen  years.  The  foundations  of  modern  France  are 
laid,  not  for  her  best  interests,  but  with  majestic  symmetry 
and  solidity;  the  country  is  tranquil  and  prosperous;  science  is 
unusually  brilliant;  and  the  first  rays  of  the  Romantic  dawn 
whiten  the  distant  hill-tops. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

1.  FRENCH  HISTORY  IN  THE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY  IN  GENERAL. 

LAVISSE   and   RAMBAUD    (editors).     Histoire   G6n6rale.     Vols.   IX,    X, 

XI,  XII.     Svo.     Colin.  Paris.     1897-1901. 

Cambridge  Modern  History.     Vols.  IX,  X,  XI,  XII.     Macmillan,  Lon- 
don, New  York.     1906-10. 
CH.  SEIGNOBOS.     Histoire  Politique  de  1'Europe  Contemporaine.     Svo. 

Colin,   Paria     1897. 
MACVANE     (translator).     Seignobos's    Political     History    of    Modern 

Europe.     Svo.     Holt,   New  York.     1900. 
PAUL  WIRIATH  and  J.  E.  C.  BODLEY.     Art.  "  France,"  in  Encyclopedia, 

Britannicd,  llth  ed.      (Particularly  good.) 
VAST  and  JALLIFER.     Histoire  Contemporaine.     Cours  de  Philosophic. 

Garnier  FrSres,  Paris.     1907.      (Excellent  classical  textbook.) 
J.    JAURES    (editor).     Histoire    Socialiste.     Svo.     Rouff  &   Co.,    Paris. 

1899.      (Extremely  unequal.     Large  portions  worthless.     JaurSs's 

and  Thomas's  are  best.) 

2.  NAPOLEON. 

W.  M.  SLOANE.  The  Life  of  Napoleon  Bonaparte.  4  vola  The  Cen- 
tury, New  York.  1901.  (Illustrated.  Readable  and  scholarly. 
Bibliography.) 

P.  BONDOIS.  Napoleon  et  la  Soci6t6  de  son  Temps.  Svo.  445  pp. 
Alcan,  Paris.  1895. 

G.  MERLET.  Tableau  de  la  Littfirature  FranQaise,  1800-15.  3  vols. 
Svo.  Didier,  Paris.  1878-83. 

LANZAC  DE  LABORIE.  Paris  sous  Napoleon.  8  vols.  Plon  Nourrit, 
Paris.  1911  sey. 

(Innumerable  Histories  and  Memoirs.  Cf.  particularly  Thiers  and 
Masson.) 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE 

II.  NAPOLEON 

1769  August  15.     Born  at  Ajaccio,  Corsica. 
1793  Contributes  to  recapture  of  Toulon. 

1795  October  5   (13  Vendgmiaire).     Suppresses  a  rising  in  Paris   (the 

"whiff  of  grape-shot"). 

1796  March  9.     Marriage  with  Josephine  de  Beauharnais. 
1796-97  Italian  Campaign. 

1797  October  17.     Peace  of  Campo-Formio. 
1798-99  Egyptian  Expedition. 

1799  November  9   (18  Brumaire).     Coup  d'Etat.     Provisional  Consul. 

1800  Second  Italian  Campaign.     Marengo. 

1801  Peace  of  Lun$ville  with  Austria. 
1801-2  Concordat  and  Organic  Articles. 

1802  Peace  of  Amiens  with  England. 
1802  August  2.     Consul  for  life. 

1804  December  2.     Crowned  Emperor.     Civil  Code. 

1905  King    of    Italy.     Third    Coalition.     Ulm.     Trafalgar.     Austerlitz. 

Peace  of  Presbourg  (with  Austria). 
1806  Protector  of  the  Confederation  of  the  Rhine.     Battles  of  Jena  and 

Auerstaedt. 

1806  November  21.     Berlin  Decree  (Continental  Blockade). 

1807  Eylau,  Priedland.     Peace  of  Tilsit. 

1808  Spanish  War.     Creation  of  the  Imperial  University. 

1809  Fifth  War  with  Austria.     Essling.     Wagram.     Peace  of  Vienna. 

1810  Marries  Marie-Louise  of  Austria. 

1811  Birth  of  the  King  of  Rome. 

1812  Russian  Expedition.     Moscow.     Beresina. 

1813  The  War  of  Liberation.     Battle  of  Leipzig. 

1814  Campaign  of  France.     Paris  taken  by  the  Allies. 
April  11.     Abdication. 

May  4.     Elba.     Return  of  the  Bourbons. 

1815  March  1.     Lands  near  Cannes. 

March  20.     Arrives  in  Paris.     The  Hundred  Days. 
June  18.     Waterloo. 

-June  22.     Abdication.     October:  Saint  Helena. 
1821  May  5.     Death  of  Napoleon. 


87 


88     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 


a  | 


P5 


S  — 


fc  « 

•<<  * 

o  ' 

«  I 

B 


s  a  *s 


il 

-sill 
i£s^ 


fiO-d 


ls 


-i 


1 

tor  Napole 
Pretender) 


11 


32- 
JOOWO-d 


III 


-llll« 


CHAPTEE   III 
CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY 

§  1.  Unity  and  Divisions  of  the  Period. — The  Crisis  (1814-16) — The 
first  Restoration — Failure  of  the  Bourbons — The  Hundred  Days ; 
Waterloo — Embitter  the  feud  between  France  and  Europe — Give  the 
start  to  the  Napoleonic-democratic  legend — The  Second  Restora- 
tion: the  White  Terror. 

§2.  The  Restoration  (1816-30).— Moderate  liberalism  under  Decazes, 
1816-20 — Reaction  under  Villfile,  1821-28;  Clericalism:  the  Jesuits, 
the  "  Congregation  " — Revival  of  liberalism  in  Europe  and  in  France 
— Return  to  liberalism  with  Martignac,  1828-29 — Reaction  under 
Polignac,  1829-30— Fall  of  the  Bourbons. 

FROM  1814  to  1848  the  Government  of  France  was  a  consti- 
tutional monarchy,  closely  modelled  upon  that  of  England :  even 
Napoleon,  during  his  brief  return  to  power,  had  to  put  up  with 
principles  and  institutions  imported  from  over  the  Channel.  As 
the  richest  taxpayers  alone  had  the  right  to  vote,  only  one  class, 
a  limited  aristocracy  of  wealth,  the  upper  bourgeoisie,  was 
directly  represented.  No  radical  change  took  place  in  the 
financial  and  foreign  policies  of  France  under  three  kings  and 
two  flags:  it  was  a  time  of  recuperation,  economy,  and  peace. 
The  Eomantic  movement  was  coextensive  in  duration  with  the 
political, domination  of  the  middle  classes :  it  was  its  complement 
and  a  protest  against  it.  In  many  respects,  therefore,  these 
thirty-four  years  of  constitutional  monarchy  form  a  well- 
characterized  unit. 

But  we  should  consider  separately  three  main  divisions  of  this 
period.  First  of  all,  the  tragic  introduction  to  three  decades 
of  calm:  the  years  1814-16  saw  the  fall  of  the  Empire,  the 
return  of  the  Bourbons,  the  Hundred  Days  and  Waterloo,  the 


90     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

second  Restoration  and  the  carnival  of  reaction  known  as 
the  White  Terror:  a  brief  crisis,  but  fraught  with  consequences 
which  even  yet  are  potent  in  French  political  life.  The  Revolu- 
tion of  1830  separates  the  Restoration  from  the  July  monarchy; 
although  it  did  not  affect  the  essential  principles  of  society,  it 
wrought  many  important  changes.  'Politically,  the  last  vestiges 
of  the  ancient  regime  disappeared:  the  prerogative  of  the  King, 
the  heredity  of  the  peerage,  had  the  same  fate  as  their  symbol, 
the  white  flag  of  old  France.  The  Legitimist  nobility  sulked  in 
its  aristocratic  faubourg;  the  extension  of  the  franchise,  the 
development  of  commerce  and  industry,  reduced  the  political 
importance  of  landed  proprietors  and  increased  that  of  business 
men.  The  ghost  of  feudalism  being  exorcised,  plutocracy  and 
philistinism  ruled  supreme,  and  the  bourgeoisie,  having  attained 
its  goal,  found  itself  obliged  to  defend  its  position  against 
militant  democracy.  Romanticism,  which  during  the  first 
decades  of  the  Restoration  sought  its  inspiration  in  absolute 
monarchy  and  the  Catholic  Church,  now  veered  towards 
liberalism,  and  at  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Louis-Philippe  was 
deeply  tinged  with  humanitarian  socialism. 

§  1.  UNITY   AND   DIVISIONS   OF   THE    PERIOD. — THE    CRISIS 
(1814-16). 

In  1814,  defeated  in  his  admirable  campaign  of  France,  unable 
to  save  his  capital,  abandoned  by  the  Marshals  he  had  created 
and  by  the  Senate  he  had  packed  with  the  most  servile  of  his 
followers,  feeling  that  the  country  was  at  last  exhausted,  in- 
different, or  even  hostile,  Napoleon  was  compelled  to  abdicate, 
and  withdrew  to  the  island  of  Elba.  We  should  guard  against 
the  romantic  and  sentimental  instinct  which  prompts  us  to  idolize 
great  victims,  even  those  who  deserve  their  fate.  The  attitude 
of  Napoleon's  servants,  cruel  and  cowardly  though  it  seemed,  was 
not  a  sudden  explosion  of  ingratitude:  it  marked  the  end  of  a 
nightmare.  For  several  years,  whoever  approached  the  Emperor 
long  enough  not  to  be  blinded  by  his  halo  of  glory  had  suspected 
or  found  out  that  he  was  no  longer  in  his  right  mind :  but  his 
prestige  was  still  so  great,  his  control  of  the  governmental 
machinery  so  absolute,  that  no  one  dared  "  bell  the  tiger." 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  91 

Napoleon  out  of  the  way,  the  Bourbons  were  the  only  possible 
solution.  Not  that  France  was  sighing  for  their  return  and 
had  kept  green  the  memory  of  the  old  regime:  the  stanchest 
friends  of  the  old  monarchy  were  still  in  exile,  and  the  great 
majority  of  the  French  either  had  been  benefited  by  the  Revolu- 
tion or  had  rallied  to  the  new  order  under  Napoleon.  But  the 
Emperor  had  gradually  led  France  back  to  monarchical  institu- 
tions, whilst  his  tyranny  made  the  despotism  of  the  Louis  seem 
light  in  comparison.  It  was  he  who  prepared  the  return  of  his 
successors,  or,  in  Talleyrand's  terms,  "made  their  bed." 
Europe  would  accept  no  perpetuation  of  the  Empire,  with  Marie- 
Louise  as  Regent  or  Joseph  as  Lieutenant-General.  Both  the 
Allies  and  a  large  part  of  France  still  shuddered  at  the  memory 
of  the  Terror,  and  a  second  Republic  was  not  seriously  considered. 
It  was  evident  that  any  new  dynasty,  French  or  foreign,  would 
strike  no  roots  in  the  national  soil.* 

So  the  Bourbons,  whose  "  legitimate  "  claim  was  indisputable, 
were  imposed  by  the  victors  upon  a  nation  which  felt  for  them 
neither  enthusiasm  nor  irremediable  hostility.  The  old  Jacobins 
and  the  Imperialists  were  reduced  to  impotence.  The  middle 
class  and  the  peasantry  were  reconciled  as  soon  as  the  essential 
conquests  of  the  Revolution  were  guaranteed  by  a  Constitutional 
Charter,  f 

In  a  few  months  the  Bourbons  spoilt  their  every  chance  of 
reconciling  modern  France  to  their  rule.  King  Louis  XVIII, 
obese,  gouty,  half-paralysed,  was  devoid  of  prestige,  but  not 
of  common  sense:  his  easygoing  scepticism,  his  desire  to  end 
his  days  comfortably  on  his  throne,  saved  him  from  fanaticism 
and  made  him  a  tolerable  constitutional  king.  But  even  he, 
in  the  insolence  of  his  restored  power,  affected  to  consider  the 
Charter"  as  a  free  grant  on  his  part,  and  dated  his  return  "  the 
nineteenth  year  of  his  reign."  His  brother,  Monsieur,  Count 
of  Artois,  known  hitherto  for  the  dissipation  of  his  youth  and 
his  cowardly  selfishness  during  the  Revolution,  was  the  type  of 

•  Bernadotte  seems  to  have  been  a  candidate. 

t  These  conquests  embraced  civil  equality,  representative  government, 
and  the  confirmation  to  its  present  owners  of  Church  and  other  property 
confiscated  and  sold  during  the  Revolution. 


92     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

those  emigrating  nobles  who  had  "  learnt  nothing  and  forgotten 
nothing/'  It  was  the  open  boast  of  his  clique  that  the  Charter 
was  but  a  decoy;  that  confiscated  properties  and  abolished 
feudal  rights  would  soon  be  restored  to  their  rightful  owners; 
that  justice  would  soon  overtake  the  criminals  who  had  played 
a  part  in  the  Revolution.  The  heroes  of  the  late  wars  were 
treated  as  little  better  than  bandits.*  France  had  a  vision  of  the 
old  regime  at  its  worst,  shorn  of  its  historical  glamour,  embittered 
by  twenty-six  years  of  defeat  and  exile,  attempting  to  fasten 
itself  once  more  upon  her. 

Meanwhile  Napoleon  was  busy  in  his  microscopic  domain  of 
Elba.  Restored  to  health  by  a  few  months  of  comparative 
repose,  aware  of  the  fact  that  the  Allies  were  planning  to  murder 
him,  or  to  kidnap  him  and  keep  him  in  closer  confinement, 
informed  of  the  growing  unpopularity  of  the  Bourbons,  he 
launched  forth  in  his  most  desperate  and  most  romantic 
adventure.  Eluding  the  enemies'  cruisers  with  the  same 
fortune  as  in  1799,  he  landed  near  Cannes  on  March  1,  1815. 
Within  three  weeks  he  was  in  Paris,  all  the  troops  sent  against 
him  having  joined  his  ranks.  "  The  eagle  had,"  once  more, 
"  flown  from  steeple  to  steeple  to  the  towers  of  Notre-Dame." 

Louis  XVIII  and  his  Court  fled  in  indecorous  haste.  But  it 
should  not  be  assumed  that  Napoleon's  return  was  unanimously, 
or  even  generally,  welcome.  "  They  have  let  me  come  as  they 
have  let  the  others  go,"  Napoleon  himself  remarked.  It  was 
evident  that  the  new  Empire  would  have  to  be  radically  different 
from  the  old:  a  Constitution  closely  resembling  the  Charter 
was  drawn  by  a  bitter  opponent  of  autocracy,  Benjamin 
Constant,  and  its  title,  "  Supplement  t  to  the  Constitutions  of 
the  Empire,"  was  a  polite  fiction  meant  to  soothe  the  vanity 
of  the  sovereign.  The  plebiscite  by  which  this  instrument  was 
ratified  revealed  the  indifference  and  diffidence  of  the  people — 
barely  one-fourth  of  the  electorate  took  the  trouble  of  going  to 
the  polls.  The  ceremony  in  which  it  was  promulgated  seemed 
a  vain  show,  and  Bonaparte's  theatrical  costume  failed  to  impress 
the  Parisian  crowd  at  the  Champ  de  Mars,  turned  into  a  Champ 
de  Mai.  The  Emperor  felt  himself  surrounded  by  secret  or 

•  Les  brigands  de  la  Loire.  t  Additional  Act 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  93 

open  enemies — Massena,  Lanjuinais,  Laine.  He  had  to  call 
to  his  aid  men  whom  he  had  kept  away  on  account  of  their 
liberal  opinions — Lafayette,  Carnot,  his  brother  Lucien.  Worst 
of  all,  he  did  not  dare  to  dismiss  Fouche,  who  had  betrayed  him 
once  and  was  ready  to  betray  him  again.  And  Europe  was 
irreconcilable.  Davout  managed  to  levy  and  organize  an  army 
of  200,000  men.  Napoleon,  indifferently  served  by  second-rate 
lieutenants  like  Grouchy,  himself  listless,  drowsy,  lacking  in 
his  former  daring  and  keenness,  was  crushed  at  Waterloo  on 
the  18th  of  June,  1815.  Four  days  later  he  abdicated  for  the 
second  time,  and  within  a  few  weeks  he  was  a  prisoner  on  the 
British  ship  Bellerophon. 

Had  Waterloo  been  as  brilliant  a  victory  as  it  was  an  utter 
rout,  the  fate  of  the  world  would  have  been  essentially  the  same. 
Waterloo  might  have  happened  several  years  earlier  and  gone  by 
the  name  of  Pultusk  or  Lobau;  it  might  have  been  delayed  by 
a  few  years,  if  luck  had  served  Bonaparte.  The  final  result  was 
inevitable.  He  was  waging  war,  not  even  for  his  own  sake,  but 
for  its  own  sake,  against  the  interests  of  Europe,  against  the 
interests  of  France  and  of  his  dynasty.  The  wonder  is  that  the 
collapse  did  not  occur  earlier. 

But  these  Hundred  Days  of  Empire  had  far-reaching 
consequences.  First  of  all,  they  made  more  difficult  the  healing 
of  the  breach  between  France  and  Europe.  The  Allies  had 
been  comparatively  moderate  in  1814;  they  had  been  treated 
by  at  least  a  part  of  the  Parisian  population  as  friends  and 
deliverers,  and  Alexander  of  Eussia,  for  one,  had  behaved  as 
such.  But,  infuriated  by  their  renewed  fear,  they  were  merciless 
and  brutal  in  1815.  Henceforth  the  conservative  powers  of 
continental  Europe  considered  France  as  a  constant  source  of 
danger- to  their  domains  and  their  principles.  On  the  other 
hand,  Waterloo  and  the  second  invasion  rankled  in  the  French 
mind  for  fifty-five  years,  until  worse  disasters  effaced  the 
memory.  Curiously  enough,  the  mad  venture  of  the  Hundred 
Days  was  the  starting-point  of  the  democratic- Napoleonic  legend. 
Had  the  Bourbons  handled  the  situation  with  a  little  more 
skill,  Napoleon  would  have  remained  in  the  popular  mind  what 
he  was  in  1814 — a  great  military  genius,  but  a  tyrant.  1815 


94     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

wiped  away  ten  years  of  absolutism  and  made  him  again  what 
he  was  at  the  time  of  the  Consulate:  the  heir,  the  champion, 
the  "  crowned  soldier "  of  the  Eevolution,  the  defender  of  the 
tricolour  flag,  the  representative  of  the  national  spirit  against 
invaders.  The  reaction  in  Europe  and  in  France  gave  some 
substance  to  this  conception:  Napoleon,  the  arch-enemy  of 
kings,  must  have  been  the  friend  of  the  people,  the  Prometheus 
of  Democracy.  With  consummate  skill,  he  assumed  that  new 
role  at  .Saint  Helena,  until  even  some  of  the  German  patriots 
who  had  so  heroically  risen  against  him  began  to  worship  him 
as  blindly  as  the  French.  His  romantic  exile  in  a  remote 
island  served  his  glory  infinitely  better  than  commonplace 
retirement  in  England  or  in  America. 

The  most  immediate  result  of  the  Hundred  Days  was  a 
recrudescence  of  reaction  in  France.  The  Royalists,  after  their 
ridiculous  discomfiture,  returned  more  enraged  than  in  1814, 
and  more  obviously  the  proteges  of  the  foreigners.  The  White 
Terror  held  Languedoc  and  Provence  in  its  grip.  The  hero 
of  Bergen,  Marshal  Brune,  was  murdered  by  the  mob  at  Avignon 
because  he  had  held  command  under  Napoleon  in  the  last 
campaign.  It  was  not  safe  even  for  royal  officers  to  interfere 
with  the  vengeance  of  the  savage  Southern  bands.  Nor  was 
violence  the  monopoly  of  the  irresponsible  populace.  The 
Court  was  clamouring  for  blood.  The  elections  of  August  24, 
1815,  gave  a  Chamber  of  Deputies  which  Louis  XVIII,  in  the 
first  flush  of  enthusiasm,  called  "  introuvable "  (matchless). 
Ney,  whose  conduct  in  1815  is  indefensible,  but  who  was  "  the 
bravest  of  the  brave "  and  had  done  wonders  in  the  retreat 
from  Moscow,  Labedoyere,  a  chivalrous  young  officer,  were  shot 
by  French  bullets.  The  Provosts'  Courts,  no  less  anti-constitu- 
tional and  hardly  less  bloodthirsty  than  the  Revolutionary 
Tribunal  of  the  Convention,  carried  on  the  work  of  ruthless 
repression.  The  Ultra-royalists  claimed  to  be  more  royalist 
than  the  King;  their  motto  was  "God  save  the  King,  in  spite 
of  all,"  i.e.,  in  spite  of  himself  if  need  be.  They  were  so  eager 
to  "  purify  "  everything,  magistracy,  army,  administration,  that 
Louis  XVIII  expressed  the  fear  that  they  would  finally  "  purify 
him."  The  most  conservative  statesmen  in  Europe,  Nesselrode, 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  95 

Wellington,  realized  that  a  few  more  months  of  such  a  regime 
would  lead  to  a  renewal  of  the  civil  war.  Louis  XVIII,  although 
he  maintained  in  theory  the  integrity  of  his  divine  right,  was  in 
practice  liberal  and  moderate.  De  Richelieu,  his  Minister,  was 
an  upright  and  enlightened  man.  Chiefly  under  the  influence 
of  Decazes,  the  dissolution  of  the  "  matchless  Chamber "  was 
decided  upon  (September  5,  1816).  On  the  4th  of  October  a  more 
reasonable  body  was  elected,  and  the  Restoration  started  on  its 
normal  course.  But  so  bitter  were  the  memories  of  these  few 
months  that  only  a  miracle  of  patient  skill  could  have  bridged  the 
gulf  between  modern  France  and  the  legitimate  monarchy. 

§  2.  THE  RESTORATION  (1816-30). 

Two  kings  only,  the  two  brothers  of  Louis  XVI,  were  destined 
to  ascend  the  restored  throne  of  the  Bourbons.  Their  reigns, 
very  different,  as  were  their  personalities,  were  none  the  less 
curiously  symmetrical :  both  began  in  reaction,  saw  an  effort 
towards  liberalism,  and  a  final  relapse  into  reaction. 

We  have  just  sketched  the  short  and  violent  period  of  Ultra- 
royal  ism  to  which  the  dissolution  of  the  "  matchless  Chamber  " 
put  an  end.  From  1816  to  1820  moderation  prevailed  under 
the  inspiration  of  Decazes,  a  personal  favourite  of  Louis  XVIII. 
An  electoral  law  gave  the  franchise  to  any  Frenchman  over  thirty 
years  of  age,  not  otherwise  disqualified,  who  paid  300  francs  in 
direct  taxes.  No  one  could  be  elected  unless  he  were  over  forty 
and  paid  1,000  francs  in  direct  taxes.  There  were  barely  90,000 
electors  in  France,  and  only  15,000  who  were  eligible  to  the 
Chamber.  Yet  this  was  a  progress  on  the  sham  organization 
of  Napoleon.  An  Army  Bill  was  presented  by  Gouvion-Saint- 
Cyr,  and  remained  the  law  of  the  land,  without  any  essential 
modifications,  until  after  the  war  of  1870.  The  term  of  active 
service  was  six  years.  The  contingent  was  drawn  by  lot  and 
fixed  at  40,000  a  year.  As  nearly  150,000  young  men  became 
of  age  every  year,  the  great  majority  of  the  people  escaped  the 
burdensome  honour  of  serving  with  the  colours.  Substitutes 
were  accepted:  so  the  sons  of  the  wealthy  classes  who  had 
drawn  an  unfavourable  number  had  the  possibility  of  buying 
themselves  off.  (1818.)  Thanks  to  his  friendship  with  Alexander 


96     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

of  Russia,  de  Richelieu,  who  was  still  the  nominal  head  of  the 
Ministry,  secured  the  withdrawal  of  foreign  troops  from  the 
territory  of  France  two  years  before  the  time  appointed  in  the 
treaties  of  1815  (November  18) .  Finally  a  liberal  law  on  the  Press 
was  passed.  Thus  were  all  the  great  questions  which  confronted 
the  Restoration  settled  in  a  cautiously  progressive  spirit.  But 
the  growth  of  liberalism,  visible  at  each  yearly  election,* 
incensed  the  Ultra-royalists  and  began  to  frighten  some  of  the 
moderates:  even  Richelieu,  open-minded  though  he  was,  felt 
uneasy,  and  withdrew  in  1818.  The  King  still  supported 
Decazes,  and  granted  him  the  "batch  of  peers" — mostly  civil 
and  military  servants  of  Napoleon — which  he  needed  in  order  to 
overcome  the  opposition  of  the  Upper  House.  But  when  Isere 
sent  to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies — which  refused  to  admit  him 
— Gregoire,  the  former  member  of  the  Convention  and  Bishop  of 
the  Constitutional  Church,  the  Ultras  affected  to  consider  this 
election  as  a  scandal,  a  provocation,  and  a  menace;  Decazes 
himself,  a  skilful  trimmer  rather  than  a  man  of  stanch  prin- 
ciples, seemed  ready  to  amend  the  electoral  law  in  a  reactionary 
sense.  While  he  was  thus  wavering  in  his  course,  the  act  of  an 
irresponsible  fanatic  drove  him  from  power.  Louvel  stabbed  to 
death  the  Duke  of  Berry,  second  son  of  the  Count  of  Artois, 
ill  whom  centred  the  Bourbons'  last  hopes.  With  cruel 
injustice,  this  crime  was  ascribed  to  the  tolerant  policy  of  the 
Minister,  and,  in  spite  of  the  King's  reluctance  to  part  with  his 
favourite,  Decazes  was  compelled  to  resign,  t 

Then  followed,  under  Richelieu  (1820-21)  and  Villele  (1821- 
28),  a  period  of  reaction,  barely  tempered  by  the  waning 
influence  of  Louis  XVIII  until  1824,  open  and  thoroughgoing 
under  Charles  X.  A  law  giving  the  richest  taxpayers  a  double 
vote  secured  the  return  of  ultra-royalist  deputies  in  such 
numbers  that  the  "  matchless  Chamber  "  found  its  match  at  last 
(Chambre  retrouvee).  In  order  to  perpetuate  themselves  in 
power,  the  Ultras  passed  a  law  making  the  Chamber  septennial 

•  One-fifth  of  the  Chamber  was  renewed  every  year. 

t  Louvel's  intentions  were  frustrated :  seven  months  after  the  death  of 
his  father  "  the  child  of  the  miracle  "  was  born — the  Duke  of  Bordeaux, 
Count  of  Chambord,  the  last  representative  of  the  elder  branch  of  the 
Bourbons. 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  97 

as  a  whole,  without  partial  elections  every  year.  With  such  an 
instrument  in  the  hands  of  a  skilful  politician  like  Villele,  the 
work  of  reaction  proceeded  apace.  This  aroused  a  correspond- 
ing degree  of  bitterness  among  the  Liberals,  so  that  even  when 
conservative  legislation  was  justifiable  it  was  violently  com- 
bated. The  indemnification  of  the  nobles  whose  property  had 
been  confiscated  under  the  Revolution  was,  after  all,  a  wise 
measure :  it  made  for  the  reconciliation  of  old  and  new  France, 
and  confirmed  once  for  all  the  titles  of  the  new  owners. 
The  1,000,000,000  francs  (really  only  625,000,000)  required  for 
that  purpose  did  not  burden  the  Budget,  for  at  the  same  time 
the  rate  of  interest  on  the  national  debt  was  reduced  to  3  per 
cent.  A  very  moderate  Bill,  the  effect  of  which  was  to  be 
limited  to  the  richest  families,  attempted  to  secure  to  the 
eldest  son,  in  certain  cases  only,  the  bulk  of  his  father's  estate. 
The  aim  of  this  measure,  like  Napoleon's  "  majorats,"  was  to 
preserve  a  rich  landed  aristocracy.  Public  opinion  considered  it 
as  a  step  towards  the  restoration  of  primogeniture,  and  it  was 
thrown  out  by  the  House  of  Peers.  Yet,  in  such  a  case,  it  was 
the  compulsory  equal  division  enacted  by  the  Revolution  and 
insufficiently  corrected  by  Napoleon  that  was  anti-liberal:  many 
disinterested  thinkers  have  come  to  believe  that  the  excessive 
subdivision  of  property  in  France  has  serious  drawbacks.  But 
it  was  obviously  class  legislation,  and  as  such  obnoxious  to  the 
French,  who  hold  equality  dearer  than  liberty  or  even  justice. 

If  these  efforts  of  Villele  were  defensible,  the  rest  of  his 
policy  was  naught  but  aggressive  reaction.  Education  wsas 
placed  entirely  under  the  control  of  the  Church.  A  law  against 
sacrilege,  punishing  with  death  the  desecration  of  the  Host, 
seemed  to  make  the  dogma  of  transubstantiation  part  of  the 
French"  Code.  A  law  on  the  Press,  called  by  its  author,  Pey- 
ronnet,  "  a  law  of  justice  and  love  " — and  infamous  ever  since 
under  that  name — was  meant  to  curtail  the  most  essential 
privilege  of  a  civilized  country:  that  of  free  discussion.  It  was 
evident  that  war  was  declared  on  liberty,  and  that  in  the  name 
of  principles.  In  the  eyes  of  those  Ultras  who  were  not  mere 
bigots  or  short-sighted  defenders  of  obsolete  privileges,  man 
was  of  his  nature  evil,  and  needed  the  constant  check  of  a 


98     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-m  CENTURY 

divinely  appointed  authority.  Freedom  meant  licence  and 
rebellion;  right  and  truth  alone  should  be  free,  and  the 
guardians  of  these  were  the  church  and  her  temporal  arm,  the 
King.  It  is  because  of  the  principles  underlying  the  policy  of 
Charles  X  that  the  French  were  so  sensitive  to  any  infringe- 
ment of  their  liberties.  The  offences  of  the  Restoration  in 
that  line  were  venial  compared  with  those  of  the  Convention 
and  the  two  Empires:  what  France  was  afraid  of  was  not  so 
much  despotism  as  theocracy,  or  priestcraft,  or  "  clericalism." 

And  clericalism  was  rife.  The  Ultras  called  themselves  the 
Knights  of  the  Throne  and  the  Altar.  The  King  himself  was 
atoning  for  his  flighty  youth  by  the  most  rigid  orthodoxy. 
France  was  covered  with  "  missions,"  processions,  and  pil- 
grimages, not  unlike  the  revival  meetings  in  this  country.  This 
in  itself  would  have  been  legitimate  enough,  had  not  undue 
pressure  been  brought  to  bear  on  the  population,  had  not  the 
alliance  of  the  Church  with  a  political  party  been  so  intimate. 
France  shuddered  at  the  thought  of  a  vast  conspiracy  to  give 
her  over  to  "  the  men  in  black."  There  was  some  exaggeration 
in  these  fears,  but  the  occult,  half-mythical  society  called  the 
"  Congregation  "  and  of  which  Charles  X  was  a  member,  was 
undoubtedly  a  power  in  those  days.  And  the  Jesuits,  the 
incarnation  of  uncompromising  theocracy,  had  returned  in 
spite  of  the  strict  laws  against  them,  under  the  thin  disguise  of 
"  Fathers  of  the  Faith." 

We  must  not  forget  that  before  the  Revolution  the  nobility 
and  the  bourgeoisie  were  Voltairian,  and  that  the  return  to 
Catholicism  after  the  crisis  was  by  no  means  unanimous.  In 
many  cases  it  was  hardly  more  than  a  poetic  pose  or  a 
sentimental  fashion.  Many  old  families  of  provincial  nobles, 
judges,  and  lawyers  had  preserved  their  Gallican  or  Jansenist 
traditions,  and  were  absolutely  out  of  sympathy  with  the  men 
who  controlled  the  Church  party.  With  the  people  of  the 
cities  the  Jesuits  were  a  bogy,  as  they  are  to  the  present  day; 
and  the  peasantry  were  afraid  that  the  ascendancy  of  the  clergy 
would  mean  the  re-establishment  of  tithes.  Clericalism  then, 
rather  than  absolutism,  proved  the  ruin  of  the  Eestoration. 

Curiously   enough,    the   fear   of   clericalism    at   home,    and 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  99 

Catholic  sympathies  in  foreign  affairs,  led  to  the  same  result: 
the  revival  of  liberalism.  The  Eestoration  of  the  Bourbons  in 
France  was  part  of  the  general  system  of  the  Holy  Alliance, 
which  everywhere  defended  conservation,  authority,  legitimacy. 
Now  it  happened  that  three  Catholic  countries  were  at  that 
time  agitating  for  their  rights :  Ireland  with  O'Connell,  Belgium 
subjected  to  Protestant  Holland,  Poland  oppressed  by  the  Tsar. 
The  Greeks,  a  Christian  nation,  were  fighting  heroically  against 
the  enemies  of  their  race  and  of  their  religion.  In  all  these 
cases  the  Catholics  had  to  side  with  the  people  against  estab- 
lished governments,  and  this  was  bound  to  shake  their  faith  in 
conservatism  and  absolutism  at  home.  The  conversion  of  the 
leading  Romanticists  to  liberal  ideals  is  due  in  no  small  degree  to 
their  interest  in  the  Greek  cause  and  the  heroic  example  of  Byron. 

A  wave  of  liberalism  was  now  sweeping  over  Europe.  The 
wars  of  1813-15  had  been  in  the  eyes  of  the  peoples  wars  of 
national  independence;  in  the  eyes  of  their  sovereigns,  wars  of 
conservation,  to  crush  a  power  of  revolutionary  origin.  The 
nations  had  rallied  round  their  dynasties  in  the  holy  crusade 
against  the  oppressors:  now  that  the  nightmare  was  gone,  they 
were  clamouring  for  the  promised  reforms,  for  the  rights  which 
they  had  come  to  know  through  those  very  French  invaders 
they  had  so  stoutly  driven  back.  The  same  evolution  was 
taking  place  in  France.  Napoleon  was  dead;  his  tyranny  was 
no  longer  feared,  his  glory'  shone  all  the  more  brilliantly  in 
contrast  with  the  absence  of  prestige  of  a  government  imposed 
by  the  enemy.  Bonapartism,  liberalism,  and  democracy  went 
hand  in  hand. 

Meanwhile  Yillele  had  further  weakened  his  position  by 
wounding  the  pride  of  Chateaubriand,  hitherto  one  of  the  most 
influential  champions  of  the  regime.  So  his  task  was  growing 
ever  more  difficult:  the  National  Guard,  reviewed  by  the  King, 
greeted  him  with  cries  of  "  Down  with  the  Ministry !  "  Villele 
at  bay  dissolved  the  National  Guard,  dissolved  the  Chamber  of 
Deputies,  and  through  a  fresh  batch  of  peers  reconquered  the 
majority  in  the  Upper  House.  But  the  elections  went  against 
him,  and  he  was  forced  to  retire. 

With  the  greatest  reluctance   Charles   X   formed   a  neutral 


100     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

Cabinet,  with  liberal  tendencies,  headed  by  a  former  lieutenant 
of  de  Villele — a  moderate  and  skilful  statesman,  a  persuasive 
orator,  Martignac.  Unfortunately,  Martignac  was  not  heartily 
supported  by  the  Liberals,  whilst  the  Ultras  assailed  him  with 
unremitting  violence  and  the  King  manifested  his  dislike  of 
his  policies.  In  1829  he  was  succeeded  by  the  Prince  of 
Polignac.  The  knell  of  the  Bourbons  had  sounded.  The  very 
name  of  Polignac  was  hateful  to  the  French  since  the  days  of 
Marie-Antoinette.  The  Prince  himself  was  a  mystic,  a  blind 
believer  in  absolutism,  at  the  same  time  obstinate  and  frivolous. 
To  the  remonstrances  of  the  Chamber  he  replied  by  a  decree  of 
dissolution.  New  elections  were  held,  and  the  hostile  majority 
grew  from  221  to  279.  Then  the  King,  interpreting  according 
to  his  own  desires  an  ambiguous  article  of  the  Charter,  annulled 
the  second  elections,  and  modified  of  his  own  authority  the 
electoral  and  the  Press  laws.  It  was  a  coup  d'etat,  and  no 
adequate  military  preparations  had  been  made  to  sustain  it  by 
force.  The  liberal  bourgeoisie  refused  to  submit.  By  closing 
their  shops,  they  practically  forced  the  people  into  the  streets. 
The  narrow,  winding,  ill-paved  thoroughfares  of  the  time  were 
favourable  to  the  insurgents.  Confusion  prevailed  in  the 
councils  of  the  monarchy.  In  three  days,  the  "  three  glorious 
days "  of  July,  the  throne  of  the  Bourbons  was  overthrown 
and  the  tricolour  flag  waved  once  more  over  the  Tuileries. 


§  3.  LOUIS-PHILIPPE  (1830-48). 

S  3.  Louis-Philippe,  1830-48. — The  Orleanist  compromise — Influence 
of  English  precedents — The  "  legal  country " :  its  narrow  basis — 
Casimir  P6rier  and  a  strong  government — Thiers,  Gulzot,  Broglie — 
Parliamentary  intrigues:  Thiers.  Guizot,  Mol6 — Guizot:  uncompro- 
mising resistance — Pall  of  Louis-Philippe. 

}  4.  General  Characteristics  of  the  Political  Regime. — Peaceful  pol- 
icy: under  the  Restoration;  under  Louis-Philippe — Peace  at  any 
price  coupled  with  Napoleon-worship. 

Bourgeois  oligarchy :  first  consequence :  the  people  driven  to  se- 
cret societies  and  insurrections — Second  consequence :  high  tone  of 
political  oratory — The  Press. 

The   Revolution   of    1830   was   an    ambiguous    victory:    the 
liberal  middle  class  had  started  the  resistance,  yet  the  final 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  101 

success  was  due  to  the  intervention  of  the  people.  Who  had 
sown,  and  who  should  reap?  The  Bonapartists  had  no  leader, 
for  the  dying  "Eaglet"  was  but  an  insignificant  Austrian 
prince;  Napoleon's  brothers  lacked  energy  and  prestige;  Louis 
Napoleon,  who  believed  in  the  destiny  of  his  race,  was  an 
obscure  young  man  without  any  immediate  claims.  The 
Republicans  were  distrusted  by  the  ruling  class:  not  only  were 
the  imperishable  memories  of  the  Terror  working  against  them, 
but,  for  the  last  fifteen  years,  they  had  been  unable  to  assert 
their  existence  except  through  riots  and  conspiracies.  Only  if 
Lafayette  had  lent  them  the  authority  of  his  long  experience 
and  of  his  immense  popularity  would  they  have  had  any  chance 
of  success;  but  Lafayette  preferred  the  role  of  a  Monk  to  that 
of  a  Washington.  Those  constitutional  monarchists  who 
resisted  the  ordinances  on  purely  legal  grounds  should  have 
been  satisfied  with  the  abdication  of  Charles  X,  the  accession 
of  the  boy-king  Henry  V,  and  the  regency  of  the  Duke  of 
Orleans.  There  were  a  few  days  of  uncertainty.  To  what 
extent  the  Duke  of  Orleans  had  carried  his  intrigues  before  the 
Revolution ;  to  what  extent  Thiers  and  other  Liberals  were  com- 
mitted to  his  cause,  is  not  yet  fully  known.  But  one  point  is 
certain:  the  influence  of  English  precedent;  the  memories  of 
the  Revolution  of  1688  were  potent  in  the  minds  of  these 
Parliamentarians,  great  students  and  admirers  of  the  British 
Constitution.  The  parallelism  between  the  histories  of  the  two 
nations,  at  an  interval  of  a  century  and  a  half,  was  indeed  strik- 
ing. In  both  a  legitimate  king  was  beheaded  and  a  military 
leader  rose  to  supreme  power;  in  both  the  old  line  was 
restored  and  a  first  king,  good-natured  and  sceptical,  managed 
to  die  peacefully  on  the  throne;  in  both  the  bigotry  of  a 
second"  king  determined  a  crisis,  which  led  to  the  setting  aside 
of  an  incorrigible  race.  All  this  seemed  to  call  for  the  last 
term  of  the  evolution :  the  substitution  of  a  new  branch  of  the 
royal  family,  whose  power  would  be  indubitably  of  constitutional 
origin.  This  was  a  case  of  deliberate  historical  plagiarism.  " 

As  in  every  French  revolution  (1792,  1848,  1870),  whilst  the 
moderates  were  trying  to  minimize  the  consequences  of  the 
change,  the  radicals  were  setting  up  a  Provisional  Government  of 


102     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXxH  CENTURY 

their  own  at  the  Paris  City  Hall.  The  Duke  of  Orleans  took  a 
bold  and  diplomatic  step,  and  went  to  that  stronghold  of 
republicanism,  to  receive,  as  it  were,  the  investiture  of  the 
populace.  Thanks  to  the  protection  of  Lafayette,  who  stood  on  a 
balcony  with  him  and  recommended  him  as  "the  best  of 
Kepublics,"  the  Duke,  Lieutenant-General  of  the  Kingdom 
since  the  abdication  of  Charles  X,  became  constitutional  King 
of  the  French,  with  a  revised  Charter  and  the  tricolour 
flag. 

But  the  July  monarchy,  established  through  a  series  of  skilful 
intrigues  ratified  by  a  minority  of  deputies  without  any  consti- 
tutional rights,  never  submitted  to  the  vote  of  the  country  as  a 
whole,  rested  on  insecure  foundations.  From  first  to  last  it 
was  called  by  good  observers  "  a  compromise,"  a  "  truce,"  a 
"  bridge  " — anything  but  a  permanent  settlement.  The  Legiti- 
mists could  not  but  feel  that  Louis-Philippe  had  tricked  his 
young  cousin  out  of  his  throne.  The  Bonapartists  were  able  to 
claim  that  Napoleon's  Constitution  alone  had  been  ratified  by  the 
people.  The  Republicans  realized  that  their  blood  had  been 
shed  for  a  cause  not  their  own.  Had  the  Duke  been  satisfied 
with  a  regency,  he  might  have  prepared  the  reconciliation 
between  modern  France  and  her  ancient  dynasty.  Had  he  dared 
to  face  a  plebiscite,  he  might  have  founded  a  truly  national 
monarchy.  As  it  was,  he  was  the  elect  of  a  handful  of  bourgeois 
politicians.  The  heredity  of  the  peerage  was  abolished,  the 
amount  of  taxation  necessary  to  obtain  the  franchise  reduced  to 
200  francs,  and  unvarnished  plutocracy  prevailed.  In  the  eyes 
of  the  law,  200,000  electors  were  the  whole  country  (le 
pays  legal),  and  the  July  monarchy  steadily  refused  to  enlarge 
these  narrow  limits. 

For  a  few  months  Louis-Philippe  had  to  pay  for  his  elevation 
by  stooping  to  flatter,  not  merely  the  bourgeoisie,  but  the 
populace.  It  was  the  time  when  any  rabble  of  loafers  could  call 
their  new  King  to  his  balcony  and  have  him  smile,  bow,  and 
sing  the  "  Marseillaise " — abominably  out  of  tune ;  the  time 
when  the  Church  of  Saint-Germain-l'Auxerrois  and  the  Arch- 
bishop's palace  were  sacked  by  the  mob,  and  when  priests 
hardly  dared  to  show  themselves  in  the  streets.  But  the 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  103 

King  was  waiting  for  his  opportunity;  he  soon  got  rid  of  his 
radical  Ministers,  and  Casimir  Perier  assumed  control. 

Casimir  Perier's  ministry  was  cut  short  by  death,  but  it 
remains  the  type  of  the  "  government  that  governs,"  or,  as  the 
French  put  it,  "  the  government  with  a  grip."  The  victors  of 
1830  had  already  split  into  two  factions,  the  party  of  resistance 
aod  the  party  of  movement.  The  one  considered  the  Revolution 
as  closed,  and  meant  to  restore  discipline;  the  other  looked  upon 
the  "  Three  Glorious  Days  "  of  July  as  merely  the  beginning  of 
indefinite  reforms.  Casimir  Perier  belonged  emphatically  to 
the  former.  Eminently  successful  in  spite  of  his  overbearing 
manners,  he  perished  a  victim  of  the  cholera  in  1831.  The 
King,  whom  he  had  reduced  to  a  mere  figure-head  whilst 
making  his  throne  secure,  wondered  whether  the  loss  of  such  a 
masterful  servant  were  not  a  blessing  in  disguise. 

Then  followed,  after  an  interregnum  of  a  few  months,  and  under 
the  nominal  leadership  of  "illustrious  swords,"  Marshals  of 
the  Empire,  another  efficient  Cabinet  in  which  Thiers,  Guizot, 
de  Broglie  formed  a  trinity  of  talent,  ably  supported  by 
specialists  like  Humann  and  de  Rigny.  It  was  during  this 
period  that  the  Eepublicans  made  a  last  desperate  stand  * 
and  that  the  romantic  dash  of  the  Duchess  of  Berry  from 
Marseilles  to  Vendee  ended  in  failure,  betrayal,  and  the 
unsavoury  scandal  of  the  prison  of  Blaye.  But  on  the  whole 
order  was  maintained,  the  ruins  of  1830  repaired,  and  progress 
resumed  its  normal  course.  The  most  creditable  achievement 
of  this  Ministry  was  Guizof  s  law  on  primary  education,  the 
first  determined  effort  in  that  line. 

From  1836  to  1840  the  political  see-saw  was  at  its  worst; 
Thiers,  Mole,  Guizot  alternate  in  power,  fighting  tremendous 
word-battles  in  which  their  personal  positions  alone  were  at 
stake,  striking  immoral  alliances,!  and  resorting  to  every  kind 
of  political  trickery.  Finally,  when  the  Eastern  imbroglio 
proved  fatal  to  the  second  Cabinet  of  Thiers,  Guizot  became 
the  actual  head  of  an  administration  destined  to  last  as  long 
as  the  monarchy. 

•  Barricades  of  Saint-Merry  in  Paris,  June,   1832,  and  April,  1834. 
t  The  Coalition  of  1839. 


10  i     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-rn  CENTURY 

Guizot  is  a  commanding  figure  in  French  history.  "  Jour- 
nalist, professor,  historian,  administrator,  Cabinet  Minister, 
Premier,  dictator  of  the  Huguenots,  there  is  hardly  any 
branch  of  human  activity  in  which  he  did  not  play  a  pro- 
minent part.  But  he  was  as  unpopular  as  he  was  admired 
and  respected;  as  selfish  for  his  class  as  he  was  disin- 
terested for  himself;  as  blind  to  the  state  of  the  country 
at  large  as  he  was  clear-sighted  in  his  bourgeois  Parliament; 
austere,  but  relying,  like  Walpole,  on  political  conscience- 
jobbing;  high-minded,  but  flourishing  before  the  electorate 
the  motto  '  Enrichissez-vous ! '  *  a  great  historian,  but  a  poor 
prophet,  who  explained  with  assumed  infallibility  the  progress 
of  civilization,  and,  not  long  before  the  Revolution  of  1848, 
declared,  '  The  day  of  universal  suffrage  will  never  come ' ; 
a  great  intellect,  but  with  blinkers;  a  great  heart,  but  out- 
wardly cold;  a  great  leader  who  wrecked  his  party;  a  great 
conservative  who,  through  sheer  blundering  and  obstinacy, 
plunged  his  country  into  a  revolution."  f 

For  over  seven  years  Guizot  worked  in  closest  harmony  with 
Louis-Philippe — without  any  subserviency  on  his  part,  for  both 
were  agreed  on  a  policy  of  conservation :  peace  at  any  price  abroad, 
inertia  at  home.  The  opposition  summed  up  the  achievements  of 
the  Ministry  in  the  oft-quoted  "  Rien,  rien,  rien !  "  t  Lamartine 
complained  that  France  was  "  bored  to  death."  The  regime 
was  threatened  with  "  the  revolution  of  contempt."  But  Guizot 
manipulated  his  250,000  electors  and  the  State  officials  in  the 
Chamber  who  were  entirely  at  his  mercy.  General  elections  and 
parliamentary  debates  gave  him  handsome  majorities.  This 
upper  bourgeoisie  was  legally  the  whole  country;  'the  rest  of 
France  he  would  ignore.§ 

*  Get  rich ! 

t  From  French  Prophets  of  Yesterday. 

t  Three  times  nothing. 

§  A  serious  blow  was  dealt  to  the  dynasty  when  the  heir  apparent,  the 
Duke  of  Orleans,  was  thrown  out  of  his  carriage  and  died  in  a  few 
hours.  This  remarkable  prince,  a  thoroughgoing  Liberal  and  a  true  "  son 
of  the  Revolution,"  left  a  son  who  in  his  manhood  displayed  the  same 
qualities,  although  not  quite  the  same  charm  and  brilliancy.  But  the 
Count  of  Paris  was  then  a  child,  and  the  prospective  regency  was  en- 
trusted to  the  Duke  of  Nemours,  the  least  popular  of  Louis-Philippe's 
children. 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  105 

Meanwhile  scandals  were  breaking  out  in  the  closed  oligarchy 
of  wealth :  a  peer  was  condemned  for  murder,  two  Ministers 
arraigned  for  corrupt  practices.  Yet  the  extension  of  the 
franchise  to  lesser  capitalists  (paying  100  francs  in  direct  taxes) 
and  to  men  who  had  received  a  superior  education  *  was  syste- 
matically refused.  A  campaign  of  political  banquets  created 
an  extraordinary  stir  in  the  country.  Lamartine,  hitherto  un- 
attached to  any  party,  took  the  lead  in  the  reform  movement. 
His  History  of  the  Girondists  idealized  certain  aspects  of  the 
Revolution  and  was  as  popular  as  any  novel.  The  last  of  these 
banquets  was  interdicted  by  the  Government.  A  demonstration 
took  place,  however,  which  soon  assumed  ominous  proportions. 
A  timely  sacrifice  could  still  save  the  regime.  Whilst  the  King, 
long  wavering,  finally  dismissed  Guizot,  the  first  shot  had  been 
fired,  the  agitation  had  turned  into  a  riot,  and  the  riot  into 
a  revolution.  With  creditable  humanity,  the  old  King  refused 
to  fight  for  a  crown  which  the  Paris  populace  had  let  him  pick 
up  and  had  the  right  to  take  away.  He,  like  Charles  X,  abdi- 
cated in  favour  of  his  grandson,  and  with  less  dignity  than  the 
last  Bourbon,  hastened  on  his  way  to  exile. 

§  4.  GENERAL  CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE  POLITICAL  REGIME. 

The  Restoration  and  the  July  monarchy  were  systematically 
peaceful  in  their  foreign  policy.  Small  credit  is  due  to  the 
Restoration  on  that  score,  for  France  was  exhausted,  sick  of 
military  glory,  and  closely  watched  by  a  formidable  coalition. 
The  expeditions  in  Spain,  in  Morea,  the  battle  of  Navarino, 
and  the  conquest  of  Algiers  failed  to  create  any  popular 
enthusiasm  for  the  white  flag.  It  has  been  asserted  that 
Charles  X  was  preparing  by  a  diplomatic  campaign  the  recovery 
of  the  Rhine  provinces ;  if  this  be  the  case,  he  fell  none  too  soon. 
The  pacifism — it  was  a  principle  with  him — of  Louis-Philippe 
was  much  more  creditable,  for,  after  the  Revolution  of  July, 
F ranee  was  eager  to  tear  up  the  treaties  of  1815,  avenge 
Waterloo,  and  support  the  democratic  uprisings  throughout 
Europe.  It  took  all  the  King's  patience  and  sanity  to  quiet  the 
excitement  of  the  country  without  ruining  at  once  and  irreme- 

•  "  Adjonction  des  capacitfes." 


106     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXra  CENTURY 

diably  his  own  position.  Several  times,  in  colonial  difficulties 
with  England,  or  when  Thiers  wanted  to  fight  all  Europe  on 
behalf  of  Mehemet  Ali,  it  was  the  King's  own  intervention  that 
preserved  peace — perhaps  not  with  all  the  appearances  of  honour. 
Louis-Philippe  knew  he  had  to  govern  a  skittish  nation,  proud 
of  its  epic  victories,  chafing  at  the  memory  of  recent  disaster,  and, 
after  a  generation  of  calm,  more  eager  than  ever  for  the  fray. 
There  are  in  France,  perhaps  more  than  in  other  countries, 
a  Don  Quixote  and  a  Sancho  Panza.  The  French  bourgeois, 
as  Doudan,  the  cleverest  of  them,  once  said,  want  at  the  same 
time  to  doze  cosily  by  their  glowing  fireside  and  to  be  roaming, 
barefooted  heroes,  on  all  the  battlefields  of  Europe.  Louis- 
Philippe  took  the  side  of  Sancho  Panza.  To  Don  Quixote  he 
gave  as  a  sop  the  strictly  limited  expedition  to  Antwerp,  and 
especially  the  dashing  and  picturesque  campaigns  in  Algeria, 
safe  from  diplomatic  complications  or  dangers  to  the  unity  of 
European  France;  the  young  princes,  the  Duke  of  Orleans, 
the  Duke  of  Aumale,  won  their  spurs  on  African  soil.  He  also 
gave  quixotic  France  a  gorgeous  pageant  of  Napoleonic  glory. 
The  monuments  in  commemoration  of  the  Imperial  wars  were 
completed;  Napoleon's  Marshals  were  covered  with  honours, 
made  peers,  ambassadors,  prime  ministers.  The  remains  of 
Napoleon  himself  were  brought  from  Saint  Helena  by  the  sailor 
prince,  Joinville,  and  laid  to  rest  with  theatrical  splendour  under 
the  gilded  dome  of  the  Invalides.  This  policy  was  apparently 
successful;  on  the  day  of  the  "return  of  the  ashes"  (December 
15,  1840)  the  King  was  wildly  cheered,  and  no  one  seemed 
to  remember  that  the  Emperor's  nephew  and  heir  was  a  political 
prisoner.  But  duplicity  is  a  dangerous  game.  LouisJPhilippe 
fostered  the  military  spirit  and  gave  it  but  hollow  satisfactions. 
Had  he  had  the  courage  of  his  opinions,  had  he  dared  to  preach 
as  well  as  to  practise  the  gospel  of  peace,  France  might  have 
been  spared  the  wars  of  Napoleon  III. 

Political  life  under  the  constitutional  monarchy  offered  certain 
peculiarities  mainly  due  to  the  small  number  of  electors.  The 
worst  and  most  obvious  of  these  was  that  the  majority  of 
the  people  had  no  lawful  mode  of  expressing  their  opinions; 
denied  a  vote,  they  prepared  revolutions.  The  Restoration  and 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  107 

the  July  monarchy  were  honeycombed  with  secret  societies. 
Fortunately  for  France,  military  conspiracies,  so  common  in 
Spain,  never  had  any  success  north  of  the  Pyrenees ;  *  a  number 
were  attempted  in  1822,  and  the  memory  of  the  four  sergeants 
of  La  Rochelle  is  still  preserved  in  popular  tradition.  The  failure 
was  just  as  dismal  when  the  Emperor's  own  nephew,  at  Stras- 
bourg in  1836  and  at  Boulogne  in  1840,  came  to  place  himself 
at  the  head  of  his  supporters.  "  Carbonarism,"  imported  from 
Italy,  was  a  counterblast  to  the  secret  organizations  of  the  Jesuits 
and  the  Congregation.  Many  liberal  bourgeois,  and  even 
Lafayette,  belonged  to  these  political  bodies,  whose  influence 
was  great  in  the  preparation  and  direction  of  the  revolutionary 
movement  in  1830.  Under  Louis-Philippe  the  secret  societies 
were  republican,  with  vague  socialistic  tendencies,  and  prepared 
many  an  insurrection;  some  of  them,  the  "Seasons,"  the 
"  Families,"  the  "  Rights  of  Man,"  represented  an  immense 
effort  which  might  have  been  used  to  better  ends.  Barbes  and 
Blanqui  were  the  two  principal  heroes  of  these  daring  and  foolish 
ventures:  Barbes,  rich,  handsome,  generous,  the  Bayard  of 
eternal  rebellion;  Blanqui,  small,  dark,  mysterious,  a  mono- 
maniac of  conspiracy,  who  spent  half  his  political  life  in  the 
prisons  of  four  different  regimes,  t  As  a  rule  the  secrets  of  these 
societies  were  in  the  hands  of  the  police,  through  spies  and 
traitors  like  de  la  Hodde.  Attempts  against  the  life  of  the 
sovereign  were  frequent,  but  isolated  individuals,  or  at  worst  very 
small  groups  of  fanatics,  were  responsible  for  them.  It  is  signi- 
ficant to  note  that  the  advent  of  universal  suffrage  practically 
ruined  the  influence  of  these  agencies. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  limitation  of  the  franchise  to  a  small, 
well-to-do,  educated  class  had  its  advantages.  Never  was  the 
tone  of  political  discussion  so  high  as  under  the  Restoration. 
The  statesmen  of  those  days  had  broad  principles  to  discuss, 
and  they  treated  them  with  an  earnestness,  a  loftiness  of 


*  Both  on  the  18th  of  Brumalre  and  the  2nd  of  December  the  army 
was  a  tool,  but  not  the  prime  mover. 

t  He  conspired  against  the  second  and  the  third  Republics,  as  well  as 
against  Louis-Philippe  and  Napoleon  III.  Cf.  G.  Qeffroy,  L'Enfermt, 
biography  as  entrancing  as  any  novel. 


108     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

purpose,  a  wealth  of  information,  which,  in  spite  of  a  cer- 
tain stiffness  and  pedantry,  did  great  credit  to  the  French 
Parliament.  It  was  the  heyday  of  Royer-Collard,  the  Grand 
Master  of  the  Doctrinaires,  every  one  of  whose  speeches  was  a 
lesson  in  constitutional  law;  of  de  Serre,  Martignac,  Camille 
Jordan,  de  Barante,  de  Broglie,  Casimir  Perier,  who  attempted 
to  hold  an  even  balance  between  the  principles  of  authority  and 
liberty,  the  policies  of  conservation  and  progress;  of  Benjamin 
Constant,  General  Foy,  Manuel,  the  great  orators  of  pure 
liberalism.  The  debates  on  the  Press  laws  of  1819  and  in 
1827  were  magnificent.* 

Under  Louis-Philippe  the  talent  of  the  orators  was  undoubtedly 
as  great,  but  the  plane  of  debate  was  lower.  Berryer  was  the 
noble  defender  of  a  lost  cause,  that  of  the  legitimate  monarchy ; 
Montalembert,  "  the  young  peer,"  as  he  was  then  called,  was 
the  aggressive  champion  of  Catholicism  against  the  teaching 
monopoly  of  the  .State;  Lamartine  remained  a  poet  even  in 
the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  and  his  prophetic  intuitions  were 
at  times  more  truly  practical  than  the  short-sighted  common- 
sense  of  a  Thiers.f  But  these  were  "  outsiders."  Among  the 
actual  leaders,  Thiers,  with  his  keen  though  narrow  intelligence, 
his  mastery  of  details,  and  his  Southern  fire,  made  financial 
problems  as  clear  and  as  entertaining  as  a  drama.  Mole  was 
an  able  debater,  who  once  held  his  own  against  a  coalition  of 
the  greatest  speakers  in  the  House.  Guizot  had  scholarship, 
strength,  and  above  all  dignity.  Yet  all  the  great  discussions 
of  the  time  are  marred  by  the  intrusion  of  personal  ambitions  or 
spite.J  There  is  something  positively  offensive  in  the  constant 
assumption  of  high-mindedness  and  infallibility  on  the  part  of 
politicians  whose  very  existence  was  based  on  class  privilege  and 
conscience-jobbing,  and  whose  short-sightedness  was  leading  the 
country  to  a  disaster.  The  utter  disgust  expressed  by  Alfred  de 
Vigny  in  La  Maison  du  Berger  and  Les  Oracles  might  very 
well  be  the  verdict  of  impartial  posterity. 

•  Guizot,  Villemain,   and  Cousin  were  then  on  the  border  line  between 
political  and  academic  activities, 
t  Cf.  on  the  railroad  question. 
t  Coalition,   Belgrave  Square   Pilgrimage,  etc. 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  109 

The  political  Press  was  influenced  by  the  same  conditions. 
The  papers  were  few  and  expensive,  until  Emile  de  Girardin 
revolutionized  journalism  in  1836.  The  National,  with  Armand 
Carrel  and  Thiers,  could  boast  that  it  had  overthrown  Charles  X 
and  elected  Louis-Philippe.  The  Debats,  ably  edited  by  the 
Bertins,  was  a  political  power.  These  newspapers,  not  easily 
accessible  to  the  masses,  were  supplemented  by  pamphlets  such 
as  those  of  Paul-Louis  Courier,  masterpieces  of  keen  satire  and 
studied  simplicity,  and  especially  by  the  songs  of  Beranger. 
The  popularity  and  influence  of  these  light  productions  was 
immense  under  the  Restoration.  Beranger  held  up  to  ridicule 
the  clerical  party,*  the  nobles  of  the  old  regime,t  and  the 
legitimate  monarchy  itself ;  %  he  exalted  a  cheap  Voltairian 
theology  §  and  the  Napoleonic  legend.||  He  was  by  no  means 
a  great  poet,  but  his  deftly  turned  verses  set  to  catchy  tunes 
made  him  a  popular  idol  until  1830 :  the  fall  of  his  arch-enemy 
Charles  X  ruined  his  trade.  During  the  first  years  of  Louis- 
Philippe's  reign  the  political  cartoons  attained  a  degree  of 
daring  and  influence  hard  to  rival  at  any  other  period.  The 
King's  personal  appearance,  his  pear-shaped  head,  his  umbrella, 
were  mercilessly  caricatured,  and  he  was  freely  likened  to  Robert 
Macaire,  the  embodiment  of  glib  unscrupulosity  and  a  favourite 
on  the  stage.  The  laws  of  September,  1835,  after  the  infernal 
machine  of  Fieschi  had  killed  forty  victims,  limited  the  freedom 
of  the  Press  and  put  an  end  to  the  scandalous  licence  of  the 
illustrated  papers. 

§  5.  SOCIETY. 

5  5.  Society. — Balzac's  Human  Comedy  as  a  document :  merits  and 
limitations — The  aristocracy :  its  silver  age  under  the  Restoration ; 
sulks  under  Louis-Philippe — The  upper  bourgeoisie — Louis-Philippe's 
Court — The  middle  and  lower  bourgeoisie :  its  weaknesses  and  solid 
virtues — Commerce  and  industry — Agriculture. 

§  6.  Culture. — Romanticism — Its  origins — Its  four  phases — Survival 
of  classicism — Popular  art  and  literature — Eclecticism. 

There  is  hardly  any  library  in  the  world  that  does  not  possess 

*  "  The  Men  in  Black."  t  "  The  Marquis  of  Carabas." 

t  "  The  Coronation  of  Charles  the  Simple." 

i  "  The  God  of  Good  Fellows."  ||  "  The  Memories  of  (he  People," 


110     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

an  admirable  description  of  French  life  under  the  Restoration 
and  Louis-Philippe:  Balzac's  Human  Comedy.  This  immense 
cycle  of  some  ninety-seven  different  works,  in  which  five  thou- 
sand characters  move  with  extraordinary  intensity  of  life,  em- 
braces every  aspect  of  society.*  Balzac  is  such  a  master  of 
realistic  detail,  he  gives  us  such  convincing  inventories  of 
household  furniture,  such  accurate  notations  of  city  noises  and 
odours,  such  flawless  transcriptions  of  legal  documents,  such 
apparently  artless  reports  of  meaningless  twaddle;  he  has 
such  cunning  devices  for  enhancing  the  lifelikeness  of  his  works, 
like  the  free  introduction  of  well-known  historical  characters 
and  the  elaborate  genealogies  connecting  many  of  his  fictitious 
heroes,  that  we  might  be  tempted  to  take  his  word  as 
authoritative.  It  may  be  useful  to  note  a  few  limitations  of 
this  undoubtedly  great  painter  and  historian.  First  of  all,  of 
humble  origin  in  spite  of  the  "  de "  he  clapped  to  his  name, 
of  a  powerful  but  coarse  physical  make-up,  devoting  all  his 
energies  to  the  pursuit  of  wealth,  condemned  by  constant 
financial  stress  to  unremitting  toil,  he  was  not  eminently 
qualified  to  describe  the  upper  reaches  of  society,  with  which 
his  direct  acquaintance  was  late,  and  at  best  very  slight.  The 
noble  faubourg  did  not  always  talk  like  the  characters  in  Musset's 
exquisite  Proverbs,  and  some  of  Balzac's  vulgar  duchesses  may 
be  true  enough  to  life.  But  there  is  sufficient  evidence  that  the 
tradition  of  wit  and  good-breeding  did  not  suffer  a  total  eclipse 
at  that  time.  Balzac,  incessantly  dunned  by  creditors  and  com- 
pelled to  take  his  walk  before  sunrise  in  order  to  dodge  the 
bailiff,  over-emphasized  the  sordid  side  of  life.  His  angelic 
ladies  are  insignificant  dolls.  His  good  people  are  mostly 
fools.  His  favourite  heroes  are  monsters. 

In  this  latter  characteristic  we  find  a  trace  of  the  great  realist's 
unconquerable  romanticism.  He  was  the  contemporary  of  Hugo 
and  Dumas:  Goriot  belongs  to  the  same  poetic  generation  as 
Quasimodo.  France,  from  1815  to  1848,  however  bourgeois 
and  peaceable  it  seemed,  was  haunted  with  fears  or  hopes  of 
new  upheavals  and  tremendous  adventures;  this  was  natural 

•  Scenee  of  Private  Life,  Provincial  Life,  Parisian  Life,  Political  Life, 
Military  Life,  Country  Life. 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  111 

enough  after  the  experience  of  the  previous  quarter  of  a  century. 
Hence  such  extraordinary  stories  as  Ferragus,  The  Thirteen, 
or  the  blood-curdling  avatars  of  Vautrin.  This  side  of  Balzac's 
novels  is  a  document  on  the  state  of  mind  of  his  contemporaries 
rather  than  a  description  of  actual  conditions.  The  standard 
romantic  hero  is  Byronism  incarnate:  all  pride,  gloom,  and 
revolt.  He  is  Didier,  Hernani,  Rolla,  Antony,  handy  with  his 
dagger,  preferably  a  bastard,  more  or  less  of  a  devil-worshipper 
and  a  "  contemner  of  kings  and  laws."  Balzac  offers  us  a 
curious  transcription  of  that  type  in  the  heartless  world-con- 
queror, unscrupulous,  handsome,  and  cold,  whose  sole  passion  is 
wealth  and  power:  Maxime  de  Trailles,  Rastignac.* 

Now  the  best  authority  on  this  period,  Thureau-Dangin,  notes 
that  these  exquisite  ruffians  were  by  no  means  numerous  and 
prominent  under  Louis-Philippe,  whilst  they  were  typical  of  the 
Second  Empire ;  they  were  "  les  hommes  forts,"  de  Moray  in 
real  life,  M.  de  Camors  in  the  novel,  d'Estrigaud  on  the  stage. 
Balzac,  then,  taught  rather  than  described  that  particular  form  of 
perversity.  This  problem  involves  the  question  of  the  relations 
between  civilization  and  literature.  It  may  be  affirmed  that  Balzac 
did  not  create  his  Rastignacs  ex  nihilo:  the  Regency,  the  Direc- 
toire,  had  already  offered  examples  of  the  combined  dandy,  rake, 
and  financier.  On  a  larger  scale,  Napoleon,  Talleyrand,  and 
Pouche,  for  whom  Balzac  entertained  such  unlimited  admiration, 
were  not  bad  models.  After  the  riotous  display  of  energy  under 
the  Revolution  and  the  Empire,  many  Frenchmen  found  the 
humdrum  life  of  the  Restoration  very  tame  indeed;  but  great 
wars  were  at  an  end,  and  the  era  of  great  enterprises,  heralded 
by  the  Saint-Simonians,  was  not  yet  a  reality.  The  pent-up 
energy  that  Balzac — or  Beyle  for  that  matter — felt  in  himself 
found  jio  outlet  except  in  the  comparatively  narrow  field  of 
Parisian  society.  It  was  not  Balzac  who  created  "  les  hommes 
forts  "  of  the  Second  Empire ;  de  Morny  was  a  full-fledged  bird 
of  prey  in  the  early  forties.  It  was  the  introduction  of  railroads, 
the  development  of  public  works,  great  industries,  banking  pn 

•  Rubempre  and  Vautrin  in  Splendour  and  Misery  of  Courtesans  are  a 
Rastignac  in  two  persons ;  Madame  Marneffe  in  Cousin  Bette  is  a  female 

da  Trailles. 


112     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

the  large  scale,  that  gave  them  at  last  a  field  worthy  of  their 
power.  Balzac  therefore  was  only  in  a  small  degree  a  teacher  of 
immoral  ambition :  he  was  partly  a  chronicler  and  partly  a  prophet.* 

This  aristocracy  which  Balzac  failed  to  describe  accurately 
was,  under  the  Restoration,  in  its  silvery  old  age.  The  splendour 
and  charm  of  the  ancient  regime  were  gone  for  ever ;  but  urbanity 
remained,  made  up  of  courtly  wit  and  subdued  dignity.  This 
was  true  of  Louis  XVIII  himself,  who,  in  spite  of  his  infirmities, 
did  not  lack  quiet  majesty,  and  who,  as  a  true  eighteenth-cen- 
tury nobleman,  was  still  appreciative  of  a  deft  epigram.  How- 
ever, there  is  a  less  admirable  side  to  the  aristocracy  of  the 
Eestoration.  Many  returned  emigres,  like  the  Count  of  Artois 
(Charles  X)  himself,  were  out  of  touch  with  modern  France. 
They  had  fallen  under  the  rule  of  narrow-minded  priests:  their 
intellects  were  stunted,  their  religion  formal,  their  hearts  cold. 
After  the  death  of  the  Duke  of  Berry  there  was  no  trace  of 
light-heartedness  left  in  the  Court;  it  became  almost  as  melan- 
choly as  that  of  Louis  XIV  under  Madame  de  Maintenon. 
After  the  Revolution  of  1830  the  last  survivors  of  the  ancient 
regime  walled  their  doors  and  windows  to  the  new  world,  and 
the  old  King  himself  spent  the  six  weary  years  of  his  exile  in 
the  impenetrable  gloom  of  Holyrood,  the  Hradshin  and  Olmiitz. 

But  whilst  some  of  the  best  families  thus  isolated  themselves 
in  their  pride,  a  fair  portion  of  the  nobility  and  practically  all 
the  upper  bourgeoisie  kept  up  the  highest  traditions  of  French 
society.  There  is  little  glamour  about  the  Restoration,  although 
it  was  the  era  of  romanticism,  and  we  are  apt  to  consider  it  as 
an  uninteresting  period.  Yet  on  closer  acquaintance  one  cannot 
help  feeling  a  strange  attraction  towards  the  refined  circles  of  that 
time.  They  were  elegant  without  extravagance:  Versailles  was 
a  memory,  and  the  gaudy  splendour  of  the  Second  Empire  was 
still  far  off.  The  art  of  polite  conversation  was  not  lost,  but  the 
frivolity  and  cynicism  of  the  Pompadour  era  had  perished  in  the 
storm.  Genuine  interest  was  given  to  literature — the  number 

•  An  entertaining:  document  on  the  social  influence  of  romanticism  is 
Louis  Reybaud's  clever  satire,  Jerdme  Paturot  A  (a  Recherche  d'une  Posi- 
tion Bociale;  on  the  same  subject,  deeper,  apparently  more  objective, 
Flaubert's  novels,  Madame  Bovary  and  L'Education  Smtimmlalr. 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  113 

of  aristocratic  poets  is  worthy  of  notice — and  especially  to 
politics,  not,  it  must  be  again  confessed,  without  a  shade  of 
pedantry.  Salons  were  political  powers  in  those  days.  The 
Duchess  of  Duras  was  the  leader  of  the  strict  Legitimists.  The 
Duchess  of  Sainte-Aulaire,  Decaze's  mother-in-law,  gathered 
the  doctrinaires  at  her  receptions,  whilst  the  moderate  liberals 
dallied  at  the  Duchess  of  Broglie's,  the  daughter  of  Madame  de 
Stael.  Madame  Recamier,  the  incomparable  Juliet,  had  also  her 
social  domain,  of  which  Chateaubriand  was  for  many  years  the 
chief  ornament. 

It  was  to  this  intelligent  upper  class,  rather  than  to  the 
fanatical  royal  circle,  that  the  Duke  of  Orleans  properly 
belonged.  But  when  he  ascended  the  throne  as  Louis- 
Philippe,  a  great  part  of  the  aristocracy  shunned  his  Court, 
which  was  flooded  with  less  refined  elements.  Much  fun  has 
been  poked  at  the  thriftiness  of  the  Citizen  King,  whose 
umbrella  is  as  inseparable  from  his  legendary  personality  as 
Louis  XIV's  wig  or  Napoleon's  grey  coat  from  theirs.  Hackney 
coaches  and  omnibuses  brought  to  the  functions  of  the  Tuileries 
worthy  tradespeople  and  their  wives,  influential  electors  and 
officers  of  the  National  Guard,  the  best  supports  of  the  regime. 
Simplicity  is  an  admirable  quality,  even  in  a  king :  it  must  be  con- 
fessed that  Louis-Philippe,  a  remarkable  man  in  many  respects, 
had  some  of  the  weaknesses  of  the  lower  bourgeoisie.  He  was 
deficient  in  artistic  taste:  the  transformation  of  Versailles  into 
a  historical  museum,  an  excellent  thought  in  itself,  was  partly 
spoilt  by  his  irredeemable  philistinism.  Strange  to  say,  many 
members  of  his  family  were  highly  gifted  in  the  artistic  line. 
The  young  Duke  of  Orleans  liked  to  gather  in  his  part  of  the 
royal  palace  (Pavilion  de  Marsan)  the  best  artists  and  writers  of 
the  time.  Victor  Hugo  was  his  particular  friend.  Princess 
Marie  was  more  than  an  amateur  sculptor,  and  the  Duke  of 
Aumale,  an  able  historian,  was  also  the  last  and  most  brilliant 
type  of  the  princely  Mecenas. 

Of  the  bourgeoisie  that  held  power  under  Louis-Philippe 
through  the  240,000  electors,*  so  much  harm  has  been  said 

•  Two  hundred  and  forty  thousand  electors  with  their  immediate  fami- 
lies would  represent  about  1,000,000  inhabitants.  But  the  ruling  bour- 


114     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-rn  CENTURY 

that  we  would  fain  take  up  its  defence.  Thrift,  industry, 
honesty — at  least  due  respect  for  the  Code — a  decent  family 
life,  all  these  qualities  were  theirs,  abundantly.  They  were 
useful  citizens,  albeit  philistines.  They  were  sane  and  respect- 
able, and  a  country  in  which  "  sanity "  and  "  respectability " 
should  ever  become  terms  of  opprobrium  would  be  in  a  dan- 
gerous path.  As  for  their  narrow-mindedness  and  narrow- 
heartedness,  their  class-selfishness  and  smug  self-satisfaction, 
these  are  also  matters  of  history.  The  July  bourgeoisie  were 
no  whit  worse  than  their  early- Victorian  congeners  over  the 
Channel;  and  without  professing  any  great  admiration  for  the 
theistic  philosophy  they  had  learned  from  Voltaire,  Beranger, 
and  Victor  Cousin,  one  may  hold  that  Chadbandism  was  not 
immensely  better. 

Commerce  and  industry  on  a  large  scale  hardly  existed  at 
all  under  the  Restoration.  The  change  came  gradually  under 
Louis-Philippe.  France  was  at  least  a  generation  behind 
England  in  this  respect,  and  the  era  of  railroad  construction 
did  not  begin  in  earnest  until  1842.  It  was  the  time  when 
Monsieur  Poirier  *  had  to  pile  up  his  million  (francs)  sou 
after  sou  in  forty  years  of  ceaseless  labour.  Many  working 
men  still  lived  in  close  touch  with  their  masters.  .  They  had 
preserved  some  of  their  old  customs,  although  the  former  Guilds 
remained  abolished.  The  "  companions,"  after  a  long  period 
of  apprenticeship  and  probation,  were  admitted  into  the  craft 
and  initiated  to  its  "  mysteries  " ;  when  going  on  their  "  tour 
of  France,"  they  found  in  each  city  an  inn  kept  by  "the 
Mother."  The  "  Children  of  Solomon  "  and  those  of  "  Master 
James  "  went  back  to  Hiram  and  a  Provencal  colleague  of  his, 
both  architects  of  Solomon's  temple.  But  the  development 
of  modern  industry  was  soon  going  to  sweep  these  picturesque 
survivals  away.  In  their  ruthless  desire  to  derive  the  greatest 
possible  profit  from  their  expensive  machines,  and  steeled 
against  humanity  by  the  prevailing  doctrines  of  political 
economy,  the  employers  kept  their  men,  women,  and  children 

geoisie   was  really  larger  than  that     Two  or  thre«  times  that  number 
considered  themselves  as  represented  by  the  richest  of  their  class. 
•  Augier,  Le  Gendre  de  Monsieur  Poirier. 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  115 

working  from  twelve  to  sixteen  hours  a  day.  Unions  and 
strikes  were  against  the  law.  The  Lyons  insurrection,  with 
its  threatening  motto,  "  To  live  by  our  work,  or  to  die  fighting," 
the  Utopian  dreams  of  the  early  socialists,  were  the  harbingers 
of  a  new  economic  age.* 

Nothing  was  changed  in  the  condition  of  the  rural  classes. 
Small  holdings  were  the  rule.  The  gradual  spread  of  better 
methods  was  shown  in  the  increased  yield  per  acre.  A  sliding 
scale  of  custom  dues  afforded  ample  protection  to  producers, 
while  enabling  grain  to  be  imported  whenever  the  crop  failed 
at  home.  Whilst  the  Empire  had  rehabilitated  and  extended 
the  main  roads,  for  strategic  as  well  as  for  economic  reasons, 
the  Restoration,  and  particularly  Louis-Philippe,  developed  a 
network  of  local  branch  roads — a  great  boon  to  the  population. 
The  system  of  canals  begun  by  the  ancient  regime  and  Napoleon 
was  completed,  the  mail-coach  service  accelerated,  the  aerial 
telegraphy  of  Chappe  (semaphors)  made  to  link  all  the  important 
cities,  t  In  short,  this  period  was  one  of  good  home  adminis- 
tration and  steady  material  progress,  but  without  any  startling 
change. 

§  6.  CULTURE. 

The  dominant  factor  in  French  culture  under  the  Restora- 
tion and  Louis-Philippe  was  romanticism.  It  coloured  all 
forms  of  art:  the  Gothic  revival  in  architecture  with  Lassus 
and  Viollet-le-Duc  is  as  much  a  sign  of  it  as  the  painting  of 
Delacroix,  the  music  of  Berlioz,  or  the  poetry  of  Victor  Hugo. 
Jean-Jacques  Rousseau  is  often  called  the  ancestor,  and 
Chateaubriand  the  father,  of  the  Romantic  school.  But  the 
movement  did  not  attain  full  consciousness  of  its  aim  until 
about  1820,  when  Lamartine's  Meditations  took  France  by 
storm.  On  the  other  hand,  the  failure  of  Hugo's  Burgraves 

•  Cf.  Chapter  VI. 

t  Atmospheric  conditions,  of  course,  interfered,  disastrously  at  times, 
with  the  working  of  the  Chappe  system.  In  1836  the  news  came  to  Paris 
that  Louis-Xapoleon  had  started  a  rising  at  Strasbourg;  then  the  com- 
munication was  interrupted  by  fog;  the  anxiety  of  th«  Government  mav 
well  be  imagined. 


116     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXra  CENTURY 

in  1843  is  generally  considered  as  the  end  of  militant  roman- 
ticism. Thus  its  life  of  a  quarter  of  a  century  falls  entirely 
•within  the  period  we  are  studying. 

There  are  static  ages,  as  it  were,  ages  of  stability,  when 
the  cardinal  principles  that  rule  society  are  universally  accepted, 
when  individuals,  institutions,  and  ideas  are  classified  and 
hierarchized  in  a  way  that  seems  rational.  There  may  be 
discontent  in  such  ages,  but  the  general  impression  is  one  of 
repose  and  order.  Such  were,  according  at  least  to  Saint- 
Simon  and  Auguste  Comte,  the  two  great  classical  centuries 
of  French  civilization,  the  thirteenth  and  the  seventeenth. 
There  are  critical  periods,  on  the  contrary,  times  out  of  joint, 
when  principles  and  institutions  no  longer  harmonize,  when 
individuals  are  torn  between  their  obvious  duty  to  the  existing 
social  order  and  their  perhaps  higher  duty  to  the  aspiration 
within  their  own  hearts.  These  are  periods  of  doubt  and  despair, 
of  revolt  and  millennial  hopes.  The  middle  of  the  eighteenth 
century  marks  the  beginning  of  one  of  these  critical  eras,  and 
Rousseau,  the  incarnation  of  disharmony,  was  its  prophet. 
Goethe  in  his  youth,  Schiller,  Byron,  Shelley,  and  in  France 
Chateaubriand  took  up  the  tale.  And  that  was  romanticism. 
It  is  the  consciousness  of  some  disorder,  either  in  society, 
mankind,  nature,  or  the  individual.  The  romanticist  feels 
himself  alone  in  a  cold,  unsympathetic  universe:  he  is  restless, 
melancholy,  led  to  suicide  or  revolt.  He  rebels  against  con- 
ventional authorities:  tradition,  common  sense,  social  discipline. 
He  follows  inspiration  in  all  things — mysticism  in  religion, 
imagination  rather  than  reason  in  intellectual  matters,  and 
passion  rather  than  law  and  prudence.  He  is  thus  a  tran- 
scendental egotist  in  his  contempt  of  accepted  values,  in  his 
belief  in  his  own  intuitions.  Such  a  state  of  mind  may  be 
abnormal,  even  diseased;  yet  it  is  indispensable  to  progress, 
"  lest  one  good  custom  should  corrupt  the  world." 

French  Romanticism  went  through  four  different  phases. 
The  first  was  reactionary,  from  1802  (Genie  du  Christianisme) 
to  about  1825.  Weary  of  rationalism  and  pseudo-classical 
mythology,  it  sought  to  return  to  Catholicism  and  feudal 
monarchy,  both  of  which,  indefensible  in  reason,  appealed  to 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  117 

sentiment  and  imagination.  The  masters  of  that  period  are 
Chateaubriand,  de  Maistre,  de  Bonald,  Lamennais.  Lamartine, 
Hugo,  Vigny,  in  the  early  part  of  their  careers,  were  Catholics 
and  Royalists.  The  Liberals,  on  the  contrary,  were  Voltairians 
and  classicists. 

Then,  shortly  after  the  accession  of  Charles  X  (1824)  began 
a  new  development:  romanticism  veered  towards  liberalism. 
This  was  due  to  the  disappointment  felt  after  ten  years  of 
unpoetical  Bourbon  government;  to  the  rise  of  the  Napoleonic 
legend;  to  the  sympathy  for  struggling  nationalities,  and  in 
particular  the  Greeks;  and,  in  a  minor  degree,  to  the  personal 
prestige  of  Chateaubriand,  who  had  quarrelled  with  his  former 
friends,  the  absolutists.  In  his  preface  to  Hernani,  Victor 
Hugo  defined  romanticism  as  "  liberalism  in  literature."  This 
led  to  the  Revolution  of  1830,  and,  immediately  afterwards, 
to  the  second  avatar  of  Lamennais — liberal  Catholicism  and  the 
campaign  of  the  newspaper,  The  Future. 

Liberal  romanticism  was  also  doomed  to  disappointment, 
for  the  power  set  up  in  1830  was  by  no  means  poetical,  or 
even  truly  liberal.  Lamennais,  who  had  tried  to  reconcile 
the  Church  and  the  State  in  the  principle  of  liberty,  was 
condemned  by  the  State  and  excommunicated  by  the  Church.* 
The  result  of  this  disappointment  was  a  period  of  spiritual 
anarchism.  Romanticism  consumed  itself  in  empty  rebellion 
01  art  for  arfs  sake.  Chateaubriand  withdraws  from  active 
life.  Lamartine  refuses  to  join  any  party.  Vigny,  after  con- 
sulting "the  Black  Doctor,"  concludes  that  he  must  remain 
"free  and  alone."  George  Sand  has  no  message  but  empty 
rebellion  against  accepted  standards.  Musset  and  Gautier, 
who  have  just  reached  maturity,  will  never  go  beyond  amused 
scepticism  in  all  social  efforts.  This  period  is  often  considered 
as  the  most  typically  romantic.  So  it  is,  both  in  theory — for 
pure  romanticism  can  lead  nowhither  but  to  aristocratic 
anarchism — and  in  point  of  fact,  for  it  was  the  moment  of 
greatest  productivity  of  the  school. 

But   most    romanticists    would    not   be    satisfied    with    this 

•  Prosecutions  against  The  Future  and  Its  school,  Encyclical  Mirari 
YOB,  ct.  Chapter  VIIL 


118     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

gospel  of  negation  and  despair.  Disappointed  in  reaction,  dis- 
appointed in  political  liberty,  they  found  a  new  ideal  in  Utopian 
democracy,  verging  on  socialism.  In  this  the  influence  of 
the  Saint-Simonians  was  considerable;  the  Lyons  insurrec- 
tion, with  its  echo  in  the  streets  of  Paris,  opened  the  eyes  of 
many  to  the  new  social  problem.  Lamennais  passed  from 
liberal  Catholicism  to  free  Christianity  and  apocalyptic  demo- 
cracy. George  .Sand  was  converted  to  the  same  cause.  The 
Revolution  of  1848,  led  by  Lamartine,  was  the  joint  triumph 
of  romanticism,  democracy,  and  socialism. 

The  influence  of  romanticism  was  not  only  profound,  but 
extensive.  Thousands  of  young  men  and  women  were,  for  a 
few  years  at  least,  carried  by  that  great  wave  of  enthusiasm. 
A  few  lives  were  wrecked  thereby;  there  were  epidemics  of 
suicide,  and  many  an  Emma  Bovary  was  led  to  adultery  and 
death  through  the  passionate  declamations  of  George  Sand. 
But  not  a  few  lives  were  ennobled,  and  even  though  Jerome 
Paturot  should  turn  into  a  commonplace  hosier,  his  early 
poetical  dreams  must  have  been  a  source  of  pride  and  comfort 
to  him  in  his  shop.  Fashion  bore  the  mark  of  romanticism. 
There  were  mediaeval  houses  and  pieces  of  furniture,  and  even 
mediaeval  costumes.  To  romanticism  we  owe  the  magnificent 
development  of  history  with  Chateaubriand,  Thierry,  Quinet, 
and  Michelet — and  it  was  the  study  of  history  which  prepared 
the  second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  for  the  philosophy 
of  evolution.  Chateaubriand  begat  Michelet  and  Michelet 
begat  Eenan. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  must  not  believe  that  classicism 
was  totally  defeated.  In  architecture  and  sculpture,  the  classical 
arts  par  excellence,  the  arts  of  repose  and  balance,  romanticism 
never  held  full  sway.  No  large  civil  building  was  erected  in 
the  Gothic  style.*  The  statues  or  groups  of  Pradier,  Cortot, 
even  of  Rude  and  David  d' Angers,  are  conservative  and  academic 
compared  with  those  of  Carpeaux  and  Rodin,  one  or  two  genera- 
tions later.  In  painting,  Ingres  is  the  uncompromising  and 
not  unworthy  champion  of  classical  tradition :  his  "  Apotheosis 

•  Whereas  in  England  Gothic  was  used  for  the  Houses  of  Parliament 
and  even  for  railway  stations. 


CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY  119 

of  Homer "  is  a  profession  of  faith.  In  literature,  the  last 
classicists  remained  in  exclusive  control  of  the  Academy  until 
about  1840,  and  when  Hugo  and  Vigny  became  at  last  members 
of  that  illustrious  body,  the  revival  of  Corneille's  and  Eacine's 
masterpieces  by  Rachel,  the  success  of  Ponsard's  Lucrece,  were 
sufficient  evidence  that  classicism  had  not  capitulated. 

It  is  in  neither  of  the  rival  schools  that  we  must  look  for 
the  average  literature  of  the  time,  but  in  such  neutral  com- 
positions as  the  songs  of  Beranger,  the  innumerable  plays  of 
Scribe  or  the  spicy  novels  of  Paul  de  Kock;  it  is  also  in  the 
enormous  romances  spun  out  for  serial  publication  by  Alexandre 
Dumas  and  Eugene  Sue,  two  literary  "  captains  of  industry " 
whose  works  were  immensely  popular  with  all  classes;  it 
is  especially  in  "  eclecticism."  The  French  constitutional 
monarchy  was  an  eclectic  regime,  an  unstable  compound  of 
tradition  and  liberty,  and  eclecticism  seems  in  many  respects 
the  keyword  of  the  period.  Thus  Casimir  Delavigne,  and  after 
him  Ponsard  and  Augier,  tried  to  combine  some  of  the  pic- 
turesqueness  and  dramatic  vivacity  of  romanticism  with  the 
sober  regularity  of  the  old  French  tragedy.  The  same  com- 
bination is  found  in  many  painters.  Horace  Vernet,  the  last 
of  a  long  and  famous  line,  and  Louis-Philippe's  especial 
favourite,  left  innumerable  battle-scenes  which  are  still  widely 
popular.  Paul  Delaroche,  a  Casimir  Delavigne  on  canvas,*  gave 
historical  pictures  which  are  a  sane  and  creditable  compromise 
between  the  styles  of  Ingres  and  Delacroix. 

Romanticism  did  not  evolve  a  philosophy :  this  is  not  to 
be  wondered  at,  since  it  is,  of  its  very  nature,  anti-rational. 
It  borrowed  ideas,  or  rather  impressions  and  themes,  from 
many  systems — orthodox  Christianity,  Saint- Simonism,  strange 
astro-theosophical  dreams,  the  socialistic  humanitarianism  of 
Pierre  Leroux.  The  reaction  against  eighteenth-century 
rationalism,  and  especially  against  its  late  development, 
materialism,  took  place  in  philosophy  as  well  as  in  literature. 
Royer-Collard,  and  especially  Maine  de  Biran,  started,  it. 
Cousin  crushed  the  last  disciples  of  Condillac.  Borrowing 
from  Plato  and  Hegel  to  form  his  eclectic  "  spiritualism," 

•  Cf.   "  Les  Bnfants  d'Edouard."   treated  by  both. 


120     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-ru  CENTURY 

he  became  under  Louis-Philippe  the  dictator  of  French  philo- 
sophy. But  the  wisdom  of  all  the  ages,  combined,  as  he  thought, 
in  his  system,  amounted  to  little  more  than  the  glorification 
of  common  sense  and  a  revamping  of  Eousseau's  Savoyard  Vicar. 
The  period  of  constitutional  monarchy  is  never  mentioned 
by  many  a  Frenchman  without  a  smile  and  a  shrug.  It  cer- 
tainly lacked  the  spectacular  brilliancy  of  the  two  Empires; 
it  did  not  inspire  fear,  either  at  home  or  abroad,  and  thus  it 
secured  but  little  respect.  Progress  was  steady  but  slow: 
there  was  no  magic  touch  of  the  wand,  as  in  1800  or  in  1852. 
But  neither  Charles  X  nor  Louis-Philippe,  with  all  their 
shortcomings,  led  France  into  such  an  abyss  as  the  two 
Napoleons.  'Peace,  prosperity,  a  magnificent  development  of 
art  and  literature:  surely  these  should  atone  for  the  undeniable 
taint  of  philistinism  in  the  governing  class. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

A.  DH  VAULABELLK.     Histoire  de8  Deux  Restaurations,  etc.     8  vols.  Perro- 

tin,  Paris.     1844  seq. 
C.   DE  VIEL-CASTEL.     Histoire  de  la  Restauration.     20  vols.     8vo.     Levy, 

Paris.     1860-78. 

Louis  BLANC.     Histoire  de  Dix  Ans.     6  vols.     Bailli&re,  Paris.     1841-44. 
F.    GUIZOT.     Mfimoires   pour  servir  a  1'Histoire   de  mon  Temps.     8  vols. 

Levy.  Paris.     1868-61. 
THUREAU-DANGIN.     Histoire    de    la   Monarchic   de    Juillet.     7    vols.     8vo. 

Plon,  Paris.     1887-92. 

BALZAC.     La  Come'die  Humaine.      (Innumerable  editions.) 
O.   FLAUBERT.     Madame  Bovary.     Levy,   Paris,   1867.     (Best  edition,   Co- 

nard ;  for  country  and  provincial  life,  M.  Homais. ) 

L' Education   Sentimentale.     Levy,    Paris.     1869.      (Conard ;    for   Pa- 
risian lif«  and  the  Revolution  of  1848.) 
L.    RETBAUD.     JferOme   Paturot  a   la   Recherche  d'une  Position  Sociale,    3 

vols.     8vo.     Paul  in,   Paris.     1843.      (Keen  satire.) 
STAKL,  BERTALL,  GAVARNI,  etc.     La  Diable  a  Paris.     (Especially  Oavarni's 

sketches.) 


121 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE 

///.  CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY, 


1814  First  Restoration:  Louis  XVIII. 

1815  March  20  to  June  22.     Return  of  Napoleon.     The  Hundred  Days. 

Second  Restoration. 

1815-16  Peace  of  Vienna.     White  Terror.     "  Chambre  introuvable." 
1815-18  Ministry  of  the  Duke  of  Richelieu. 
1818-19-20  Ministries  Dessoles-Decazes  and  Decazes. 

1820  February  13.     Murder  of  the  Duke  of  Berry. 

September    29.     Birth   of   the    "  child    of   miracle,"    the    Duke    of 
Bordeaux,  Count  of  Chambord. 

1821  May  5.     Death  of  Napoleon. 
1821-28  Ultra-royalist  Ministry  of  de  Villele. 

1823  Spanish  Expedition. 

1824  "Chambre  retrouvee  "   (Ultra-royalist). 
1824-30  CHARLES  V. 

1825  "  Milliard  "  compensation  to  emigres. 
1828-29  Martignac  Ministry   (semi-Liberal). 
1829-30  Polignac  Ministry  (Ultra-royalist). 

1830  July  5.     Capture  of  Algiers  by  the  French. 

July  26.     Arbitrary  Ordinances  issued  by  the  King. 
July  27-29.     Revolution  of  July.     The  "  Three  Glorious  Days." 
1830-48  LOUIS-PHILIPPE  ler,  King  of  the  French.      (The  Citizen-King:  the 

Bourgeois  Monarchy  ;  the  July  Monarchy.  ) 
1830  Ministry  Broglie-Guizot-Lafayette. 
1830-31   Ministry  Lafitte. 
1831-32  Ministry  Casimir-Perier.     Cholera. 
1832  Rebellion  of  the  Duchess  of  Berry. 
1832-36  Ministry  Thiers-Guizot-de  Broglie. 

1834  Insurrections  in  Lyons  and  Paris. 

1835  Fieschi's  infernal  machine.     Repressive  laws   (September). 

1836  October  30.     Louis-Napoleon  at  Strasbourg. 
1836-40  Ministries  Thiers;  Guizot-Mole  ;  Mole;  Soult;  Thiers. 

1839  Republican  Insurrection  in  Paris. 

1840  Second   Thiers   Ministry.     Diplomatic   difficulties    (Eastern   Ques- 

tion). 
1840  Louis-Napoleon  at  Boulogne.     Remains  of  Napoleon  I  brought  to 

Paris. 
1840-48  Ministry  Soult-Guizot. 

1842  Death  of  the  Duke  of  Orleans. 
1848  Revolution. 


122 


fc 

O.  a> 

H 

5  i* 

HJ 

• 

3     O 

Q  S-d 

OD 

£      S 

J-"- 

•««                         «      S 

x     * 

3                                  2        ^ 

»    1     1 

£          1  : 

o               2    1 
—               s    $ 
#               ^    « 

1  I  I 

s    S    a    & 

^       £•      5      S1 

:='o     -s 

-US      ! 

El-d      Q 

3 

0 

a       d 

«-~4~A       A~" 

«  2  S 

^ 

3^ 

=:       5 

"3      3      3      '3 

3    I*" 

C    M 

0 

£    £ 

3333' 

i  it 

"Q    g*eq           0 

iH              *^    S 

Q    0     « 

—  ®    g  «  |         ^ 

'     5£ 

3  s  * 

OO-d             § 

It 

§  H- 

lis 

x     riia 

d.  1820 

'.  Bordeaux, 
f  Cham- 
Henri  V") 

a 

3         -i 

»  '3 

H 

t- 

•d                ia 

>; 

i:    .'i 

•    III 

M 

-d 

1 

Lfll 

TH 

o 

us           C 

1     g     | 

3a5 

-d 

§ 

D 
0 
» 

—  x—  S 

2    S    §• 

1  :-  °: 

-fl-S-3_ 

is        i 

fe                 1    i 

2       5       2 
J3      3 

3'      its 

0                      33 

3     3 

3  —  "d 

cc 

D 

Q 

b_        l=- 

w 

^•l  —  Lils 

123 


CHAPTER   IV 
NAPOLEON  III,  1848—70 
§  1.  POLITICAL  CONDITIONS. 

1.  Political  Conditions:  the  Republic. — The  Revolution  of  1848 — 
Democracy — Socialism — The  Constituent  Assembly — The  Days  of 
June — Reaction — Election  of  Louis-Napoleon:  its  causes  and  its 
meaning1. 

2.  The  Coup  d'Etat  and  the  Empire. — The  coup  d'etat:  its  causes 
and  significance — Influence  on  French  thought — Character  of  the 
Second  Empire — Spiritual  gloom — Did  the  Empire  stifle  intellectual 
life? 

The  Roman  Question. 

THE  Revolution  of  1848  was  an  accident.  The  insurrections  of 
Lyons  and  Paris,  in  1831,  1832,  and  1834,  were  better  concerted 
and  more  formidable.  They  were  not  repressed  without  blood- 
shed, but  the  Government  issued  stronger  from  the  battle.  In 
1848,  more  tact  on  Guizot's  side,  more  decision  on  the  part  of 
the  King,  Bugeaud  called  earlier  and  given  a  free  hand,  and 
monarchy  might  have  been  saved,  at  least  for  a  season. 
Perhaps  a  single  random  shot  on  the  boulevard  des  Capucines 
was  responsible  for  the  catastrophe.  But  the  fact  remains 
that  after  eighteen  years  of  a  wise,  peaceful,  and  prosperous 
reign,  Louis-Philippe  was  at  the  mercy  of  an  accident,  and 
that  fact  is  significant.  The  July  monarchy,  the  result  of  a 
compromise,  perhaps  of  an  act  of  trickery,  had  lived  on  sufferance, 
without  striking  root  deep  in  the  soil.  Legitimists,  Catholics, 
Bonapartists,  Republicans,  Socialists,  all  were  against  it.  It 
represented  and  satisfied  no  one  except  a  portion  of  the  bour- 
geoisie. By  monopolizing  power  for  nearly  eight  years  and 
refusing  any  electoral  reform  which  might  endanger  his  political 
position,  Guizot  divided  the  forces  of  the  middle  class,  which,  even 
124 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  125 

united,  was  a  narrow  basis  for  a  political  regime.  Thus  Louis- 
Philippe  fell,  unpitied,  unregretted  in  France  and  in  Europe, 
except  by  a  few  personal  followers. 

The  Revolution  of  1830  seems  to  have  been  hailed  in  France 
with  genuine  enthusiasm :  it  was  a  great  battle  between  the  old 
and  the  new,  a  confirmation  of  the  principles  of  1789.  The 
Revolution  of  1848  was  received  with  mixed  feelings.  Some  of 
the  victors  were  ashamed  of  their  victory.  The  masses  in  the 
provinces  were  astonished  rather  than  gratified.  But  the  demo- 
cratic elements  in  the  cities  were  triumphant.  It  was  understood, 
among  Republicans,  that  in  1830  the  Duke  of  Orleans  had  tricked 
them  out  of  the  fruit  of  their  labours.  This  time,  they  meant  not 
to  be  so  easily  duped. 

And  circumstances  favoured  them.  The  Revolution  had  come 
as  a  surprise.  No  single  party  was  known  to  have  a  majority  in 
the  country.  A  republic,  at  least  as  a  temporary  expedient, 
seemed  the  only  possibility.  All  opposition  parties  had  agreed  in 
branding  Louis-Philippe's  government  as  that  of  a  minority, 
every  party  expected  from  the  people  at  large  a  verdict  in  its 
favour;  thus  for  a  moment  Legitimists  and  Catholics  joined  with 
the  Bonapartists  and  Republicans  in  their  advocacy  of  universal 
suffrage.  This  formed  a  motley  crowd  :  the  divine  right  of  kings, 
the  divine  right  of  the  people,  international  and  social  brother- 
hood, military  supremacy  and  glory — all  these  ideals  could  not 
easily  be  reconciled.  But  all  had  this  character  in  common,  that 
they  were  ideals,  and  appealed,  not  to  common  sense  and  self- 
interest  but  to  imagination  and  sentiment.  Thus  democratic 
romanticism  prevailed  for  a  time,  because  of  its  vague,  generous 
appeal,  and  because  no  other  solution  was  ready;  and  the  most 
harmonious  and  vaguest  of  poets,  Lamartine,  became  the  fitting 
representative  of  an  unpractical  and  idealistic  revolution.  The 
evolution  which  commenced  in  1824  was  now  complete:  the 
very  poet  who  sang  the  coronation  of  Charles  X  was  at  the  head 
of  a  democratic  republic.  This  triumph  had  been  delayed  by 
eighteen  years  of  clever,  shifty,  materialistic  government,  but.it 
had  come  at  last.  It  was,  indeed,  as  the  Germans  called  it,  "  ein 
heiliges  und  tolles  Jahr."  A  year?  In  France,  it  was  only  a 
season.  In  a  few  weeks  the  dream  was  shattered. 


126     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXrn  CENTURY 

The  Constituent  Assembly  was  at  first  imbued  with  the  same 
spirit  of  generous  optimism  as  the  Provisional  Government.  But 
as  early  as  the  15th  of  May,  on  a  futile  pretext,  Barbes,  Blanqui, 
Raspail  and  the  Revolutionists,  their  followers,  invaded  the 
legislative  hall.  The  affair  was  a  miserable  failure,  but  it  was 
sufficient  for  breaking  the  charm.  Diffidence,  fear,  hatred,  ban- 
ished for  a  while,  reasserted  their  empire.  Lacordaire,  who  on 
the  4th  of  May  had  fraternized  with  the  people,  sent  in  his 
resignation  after  the  15th.  Socialism  was  no  longer  looked  upon 
with  sympathetic  tolerance.  The  unreasoning  dread  of  the  "  Red 
Fiend  "  was  growing  among  peasants  and  bourgeoisie  alike. 

National  workshops  had  been  organized,  both  as  a  recognition 
of  the  socialistic  right  to  employment  and  as  a  measure  of  relief 
for  the  intense  economic  crisis  which  the  Revolution  had  brought 
in  its  train.  Well  meant,  but  poorly  organized,  they  soon  became 
the  parody  rather  than  the  realization  of  Louis  Blanc's  scheme. 
An  ever-increasing  number  of  men  of  all  descriptions  were  paid 
forty  cents  a  day  for  digging  trenches  in  the  Champ  de  Mars  and 
filling  them  up  again.  The  national  workshops  were  suppressed 
with  as  much  clumsiness  as  they  had  been  managed.  The  result 
was  the  most  formidable  insurrection  that  Paris  had  yet  seen. 
General  Cavaignac  was  made  Dictator.  He  suppressed  the  rising 
with  the  ruthless  energy  of  a  soldier  trained  in  Algerian  cam- 
paigns. Thousands  of  insurgents  were  summarily  judged  and  sen- 
tenced to  transportation.  There  was  both  in  the  struggle  and  in 
the  repression  an  element  of  implacable  ferocity  which  had  been 
absent  from  French  history  since  the  darkest  days  of  the  Terror. 
The  Days  of  June  are  an  all-important  date  in  the  evolution  of 
French  thought.  Optimistic  romanticism  was  ruined.  Its  Utopian 
ideas  were  supposed,  not  with  full  justice,  to  have  been  tried  and 
to  have  failed.  Its  representatives  were  set  aside  as  dangerous 
or  unpractical :  in  December,  Lamartine,  once  the  idol  of  the 
people,  polled  17,000  votes  out  of  an  electorate  of  eight  millions. 
The  conservative  classes  trembled  retrospectively  at  the  thought 
of  the  danger  they  had  just  gone  through.  They  craved  for 
authorities  that  would  maintain  material  order,  and  moral  order 
as  one  of  its  conditions.  The  Church  and  a  strong  government ! 
Such  was  the  cry  of  the  frightened  bourgeoisie.  "  Let  us  throw 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  127 

ourselves  at  the  feet  of  the  bishops ! "  said  Duvergier  de  Hau- 
ranne,  a  former  member  of  the  liberal  opposition. 

It  is  often  asserted  that  in  December,  1851,  Louis-Napoleon 
strangled  the  harmless,  generous,  idealistic  Republic  of  1848. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  political  and  social  reaction  began  immedi- 
ately after  the  Days  of  June.  The  true  character  of  the  following 
twenty  years  was  determined  before  their  political  form.  Had  the 
Republic  survived,  it  would,  for  many  years,  have  been  as  conser- 
vative as  any  Empire,  and  possibly  more  cruel.  In  June,  1848, 
and  in  May,  1871,  it  was  shown  that  repression  under  a  collective 
and  anonymous  government  could  attain  a  degree  of  severity  which 
would  be  unsafe  for  the  strongest  autocrat. 

The  Assembly,  swept  by  the  eloquence  of  Lamartine — it  was 
his  last  and  most  fatal  victory — decided  that  the  President  should 
be  elected  directly  by  universal  suffrage.  After  some  hesitation, 
it  refused  to  make  former  pretenders,  i.e.,  Louis-Napoleon, 
ineligible.  Representative  Thouret  made  a  motion  to  that  effect, 
but  he  withdrew  it  after  hearing  the  Prince  speak  a  few  words : 
"  I  thought  this  man  was  dangerous,"  he  said ;  "  I  was  mistaken." 

General  Cavaignac  was  still  chief  executive,  and  official  pressure 
was  everywhere  exerted  in  his  favour.  He  was  an  honest  and 
able  man,  a  true  republican,  and  the  actual  "  saviour  of  society." 
But,  for  the  conservatives,  he  was  too  incorruptibly  republi- 
can, whilst  the  democrats  could  not  forget  his  role  in  June. 
So,  in  spite  of  his  great  services,  he  was  passed  over.  The 
Royalists  could  not  agree  on  a  candidate  of  their  own:  the 
two  branches  of  the  house  of  Bourbon  were  never  fully  re- 
conciled. In  1830  and  in  February,  1848,  the  people  had 
strongly  expressed  its  aversion  for  both,  and  the  memories  of 
these  two  catastrophes  were  still  too  fresh  for  an  open  mon- 
archical .  campaign  to  be  immediately  possible.  Advised  by 
Thiers  and  Montalembert,  the  conservatives  decided  to  vote  for 
Louis-Napoleon.  Such  a  policy,  on  the  part  of  Orleanists  and 
Legitimists,  seems  at  present  suicidal ;  it  was,  to  say  the  least, 
tortuous.  Thiers  and  his  friends  wanted  to  use  the  pretender  as 
a  cat's-paw.  These  bourgeois  politicians,  so  matter-of-fact 
themselves,  had  failed  to  gauge  the  force  of  Napoleonic  sentiment 
in  the  country.  Louis-Philippe  himself,  it  will  be  remembered, 


128     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

had  toyed  with  it,  fostered  it,  in  the  hope  that  it  would  satisfy  in 
a  cheap,  safe  manner  the  people's  craving  for  glory.  It  was  the 
same  clever,  dangerous  game  that  the  conservatives  wanted  to 
play  in  1848.  "  Let  the  people  satisfy,  in  a  harmless  manner, 
their  fancy  for  a  Bonaparte.  The  pretender  was  known  to  be  a 
dolt ;  in  less  than  four  years  he  would  reveal  his  utter  incapacity 
and  ruin  his  own  cause.  While  making  himself  impossible,  he 
would  accustom  the  public  mind  to  the  idea  of  a  true  restoration. 
In  the  meantime,  Thiers  would  be  the  power  behind  the  throne." 

Thus  Louis-Napoleon  received  the  support  of  the  conservative 
elements.  He  had  already  in  his  favour  the  vast  majority  of  the 
country-folk,  among  whom  the  "  Legend  "  had  been  spread  by 
Marco-Saint-Hilaire,  Dumas,  Beranger,  and  less  directly  by 
Thiers  himself  and  Victor  Hugo.  Even  among  the  democrats 
he  had  many  supporters;  they  preferred  him  to  Cavaignac,  the 
"  butcher  of  June,"  and  they  remembered  that  he  had  written  a 
vaguely  socialistic  pamphlet  on  the  extinction  of  pauperism. 
On  the  10th  of  December,  1852,  he  was  elected  President  by 
5,434,000  votes  to  Cavaignac's  1,448,000.  Ledru-Rollin  and 
Raspail,  the  democratic  candidates,  had  less  than  500,000 
between  them.  Lamartine,  in  whom  the  spirit  of  February,  1848, 
was  embodied,  received  only  17,000. 

It  was  an  overwhelming  triumph.  Napoleon  III,  in  after 
years,  always  claimed  that  his  true  title  to  power  was  neither 
heredity  nor  the  coup  d'etat,  but  the  popular  election  of  the  10th 
of  December.  There  could  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  sincerity  of  the 
vote  or  its  meaning.  In  choosing  Louis-Napoleon  simply  because 
he  was  a  Bonaparte,  the  people  did  certainly  not  express  their 
wish  for  a  parliamentary  republic.  On  December  10th  the 
Empire  was  virtually  made.  Thiers's  prophecy,  often  quoted  as 
a  wonderful  instance  of  political  foresight,  came  three  years  later 
— three  years  after  Thiers  himself  had  helped  to  make  its  fulfil- 
ment inevitable.  The  coup  d'6tat,  the  "crime"  of  1851,  was 
but  the  natural  consequence  of  the  presidential  election.  The 
long  delay  astonished  and  disappointed  the  peasants,  who  had 
voted,  not  for  a  republican  magistrate,  but  for  a  Napoleon. 

Louis-Napoleon's  term  of  office  was  to  expire  in  1852.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Constitution,  he  could  not  be  re-elected.  An  attempt 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  129 

was  made  to  have  this  provision  altered,  but  it  failed.  The  whole 
Constitution  was  impracticable.  Alone  the  authority  which  the 
President  derived  from  his  Imperial  origin  and  his  large  popular 
majority  gave  some  unity  and  some  outward  peace  to  the  political 
life  of  the  country.  In  1852,  with  his  retirement,  this  precarious 
peace  would  come  to  an  end.  Everything  would  be  put  in  question 
again.  The  situation  was  in  some  respects  as  threatening  as  in 
1848.  The  Constituent  Assembly,  with  all  its  confusion  and 
lack  of  experience,  was  well-meaning,  generous,  optimistic,  and, 
on  the  whole,  moderate.  Its  successor,  the  Legislative  Assembly, 
was  sharply  divided  between  a  dominant  conservative  party  and 
a  strong  minority  of  advanced  democrats.  The  good  old  "  Re- 
publicans of  1848  "  had  disappeared.  Neither  party  bore  any  love 
to  the  existing  form  of  government,  and  it  was  well  understood 
that  neither  would  be  stopped  by  constitutional  scruples.  The 
conservatives  wanted  to  make  their  present  hold  of  the  country 
permanent;  the  democrats  wanted  to  reconquer  the  Republic, 
which  was  no  longer  theirs  since  the  Days  of  June.  A  restoration 
and  a  new  revolution  was  in  sight — either  entailing  bloodshed, 
an  economic  crisis,  and  the  dreaded  "  leap  in  the  dark."  The 
Royalists  confessed  that  they  did  not  "  hope  to  reach  the  Promised 
Land  without  crossing  the  Red  Sea."  Revolutionary  societies 
were  growing  everywhere.  Thus,  in  a  country  which  as  a  whole 
was  panting  for  peace  and  stability,  political  parties  were  almost 
openly  carrying  on  two  conspiracies. 

The  Prince-President  had  his  own  hopes :  but  he  alone  seemed 
to  stand  for  the  nation  at  large  instead  of  special  interests.  He 
had  skilfully  disentangled  his  cause  from  that  of  any  party. 
He  was  the  nominee  of  the  conservatives  no  doubt,  but  of  the 
conservatives  in  the  broadest  sense,  and  he  was  the  elect  of  the 
whole-people.  He  had  no  programme  but  his  name :  it  made  him 
the  traditional  representative  of  strong  government,  but  also  of 
the  national  will ;  a  prince,  but  of  a  revolutionary  dynasty  and 
known  for  his  democratic  sympathies.  He  allowed  the  conser- 
vative majority  to  take  measures  for  curtailing  universal  suffrage, 
the  great  conquest  of  1848 ;  when  they  had  thus  committed 
themselves,  he  opposed  them,  and  stood  as  the  defender  of  the 
nation's  right.  By  the  coup  d'etat  of  the  2nd  of  December, 


130     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-rn  CENTURY 

1851,  he  dissolved  the  Assembly,  "  restored  "  universal  suffrage, 
and  appealed  to  the  people  as  to  the  supreme  arbiter. 

Thus  the  revolution  expected  for  1852  was  averted  by  another 
of  a  different  kind — an  act  of  violence,  no  doubt,  a  piece  of 
illegality,  a  perjury,  but  not  more  so  than  all  other  revolutions. 
Of  all  the  many  sudden  changes  of  regime  in  France,  this  was 
one  of  the  freest  from  innocent  blood,  and  the  only  one  which 
was  immediately  and  formally  ratified  by  the  country.  An 
unworkable  Constitution,  which  had  made  its  own  revision 
almost  impossible,  was  doomed  to  a  violent  death. 

§  2.  THE  COUP  D'£TAT  AND  THE  EMPIRE. 

Louis-Napoleon's  hope  was  to  make  himself  the  grand  arbiter 
between  parties,  and  to  achieve  a  work  of  national  reconciliation 
and  reconstruction  similar  to  that  of  his  uncle  in  1800.  Unfor- 
tunately the  coup  d'etat  was  spoilt,  and  made  very  different 
from  what  the  gentle  dreamer  expected.  Violence  to  a  Consti- 
tution which  no  one  meant  to  respect  much  longer  was  more 
justifiable  than  the  revolutions  of  February,  1848,  and  Sep- 
tember, 1870;  but  the  massacre  on  the  Boulevards,  the  whole- 
sale arrest,  transportation,  or  exile  of  Republicans,  Socialists, 
members  of  secret  societies,  ticket-of-leave  men  and  dangerous 
criminals,  pell-mell,  all  that  was  without  excuse,  even  on  the 
score  of  policy.  That  was  the  true  "  crime  of  December."  It 
justified  irreconcilable  opposition,  like  that  of  Victor  Hugo.  It 
partly  invalidated  the  result  of  the  plebiscite  of  1851,  which, 
Republicans  were  able  to  claim,  was  influenced  by  terror  and 
tainted  with  fraud.  Who  was  responsible  for  this  perversion  of 
the  coup  d'etat?  Perhaps  Saint-Arnaud,  Magnan,  and  the 
other  generals  who  wanted,  by  this  display  of  savage  energy,  to 
magnify  the  danger  from  which  they  had  saved  society.  Perhaps 
Morny  and  the  financiers,  who  were  anxious  to  reassure  conser- 
vative interests  and  to  deal  a  crushing  blow  to  social  democracy. 
Perhaps  the  unscrupulous  adventurers  who  surrounded  the 
Prince  wished  to  bind  him  to  them  by  ties  of  complicity  in  a 
crime:  the  Emperor  was  heard  to  complain  that  he  had  to  drag 
Persigny  and  Morny  like  a  convict  his  chain  and  ball.  Perhaps 
they  meant  to  take  precautions  against  his  socialistic  leanings. 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  131 

Perhaps  there  was  as  much  blundering  as  Machiavelianism  in 
all  this  useless  rigour:  the  mysteries  of  the  coup  d'etat  are  not 
all  cleared  up  even  yet. 

One  thing  is  certain,  and  this  is  why  we  have  dwelt  at  such 
length  on  those  critical  days:  the  coup  d'etat  gave  its  stamp  to 
the  Second  Empire.  The  whole  regime,  like  its  initial  act,  bore 
the  mark,  not  only  of  the  kindly,  well-meaning  Prince  whom  no 
one  ever  approached  without  loving  him,  but  also  and  chiefly  of 
Saint-Arnaud,  Persigny,  Morny,  Maupas.  By  one  of  its  aspects 
at  least,  what  was  meant  to  be  a  truly  national  government 
seemed  the  filibustering  adventure  of  a  few  middle-aged  men  of 
doubtful  morality.  Popular  ratification,  unheard  of  prosperity, 
victorious  wars,  could  never  wash  off  the  stain. 

The  seven  million  votes  cast  in  favour  of  Louis-Napoleon  only 
served  to  chill  democratic  feelings  in  the  hearts  of  poets  and 
thinkers.  Even  the  great  Romanticists  grew  discouraged  and 
pessimistic.  The  new  generation  despised  the  "  rabble "  as 
much  as  their  elders  had  glorified  the  "  people."  They  wanted 
to  avoid  any  contact  with  the  populace  and  to  conceal  from 
them  all  their  emotions.  Vigny's  attitude  of  aloofness  and  stoic 
silence,  exceptional  twenty  years  before,  became  more  general. 
Men  like  Taine,  Kenan,  Leconte  de  Lisle,  Flaubert,  were,  or 
tried  to  be,  indifferent,  "  impassible,"  "  objective." 

Such  was  the  origin  of  the  Second  Empire,  and  such  remained 
its  character:  the  triumph  of  force  and  of  material  interests. 
Bonapartism  stood  for  glory  abroad,  order  and  progress  at  home ; 
but  it  was  the  glory  which  is  assured  by  a  large  and  well-drilled 
army  rather  than  by  a  righteous  cause ;  the  order  that  an  efficient 
police  force  can  maintain ;  the  kind  of  progress  which  is  measured 
in  miles  of  railroads.  In  achieving  these  ends,  Napoleon  III 
was  for  a  few  years  eminently  successful :  he  had  nobler  aspira- 
tions, which  he  failed  to  realize.  The  uneducated  masses  and 
a  clique  of  self-seekers  supported  his  government :  the  elite  of 
all  kinds,  with  a  few  notable  exceptions,  distrusted  it  and  him. 

Hence  the  note  of  sadness  which  prevails  in  literature 
throughout  these  twenty  years.  Romantic  idealism  was  hope- 
lessly defeated,  and  the  whole  world  was  darkened.*  The  new 

•  Ct  Baudelaire's  sonnet,  "  I^e  Coucher  du  Soleil 


132     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

generation  received  in  its  early  manhood  the  bitter  gift  of 
experience.  They  tried,  above  all  things,  not  to  be  dupes;  they 
guarded  themselves  against  the  ennobling  illusions  of  their 
elders.  The  frivolous  were  cynical ;  the  serious-minded  stoically 
pessimistic.  For  this  note  of  bitter  discouragement  the  Empire 
is  partly  responsible.  But  we  should  not  lay  everything  to  the 
charge  of  the  political  regime.  Democratic  politicians  like 
Camille  Pelletan  *  accuse  it  of  creating  an  oppressive  atmosphere 
in  which  literature  was  stifled,  and  of  restricting  by  open  force 
the  liberty  of  thought.  They  would  have  us  believe  that  the 
Spirit  of  France  was  taken  in  exile  with  Quinet  and  Victor  Hugo. 
These  are  wild  exaggerations :  the  "  Tyranny "  was  not  so 
thoroughgoing.  Most  great  writers,  after  a  while,  lived  on 
fairly  good  terms  with  "  Tiberius."  Merimee  and  Sainte-Beuve 
were  Senators;  About,  Augier,  Kenan,  Taine,  and  even  the 
Socialists  Proudhon  and  George  Sand,  were  the  friends  of  the 
Emperor's  first  cousins,  Prince  Napoleon  and  Princess  Matilda ; 
Vigny  was  thought  of  for  preceptor  of  the  Prince  Imperial ; 
Leconte  de  Lisle,  known  to  be  a  Republican,  was  secretly 
pensioned  by  Napoleon  III. 

The  one  thing  the  Empire  stifled,  at  least  for  seven  or  eight 
years,  was  political  life.  The  Government  could  very  well  have 
dispensed  with  its  unfortunate  method  of  interfering  in  elections 
and  occasionally  tampering  with  the  returns:  it  was  absolutely 
sure  of  an  overwhelming  majority.  The  privileges  of  Parliament 
had  been  curtailed;  only  a  summary  report  of  its  sessions  was 
made  public.  The  Press  was  "muzzled."  Home  politics  had 
thus  lost  all  interest.  But  this  was  no  disadvantage  to  thought 
or  literature ;  it  gave  authors  leisure  and  a  public.  The  "  Silence 
of  the  Empire,"  so  oppressive  to  a  generation  of  debaters  and 
journalists  like  Thiers,  gave  quieter  men  a  better  chance.  Under 
a  different  regime,  Leconte  de  Lisle  or  Flaubert  might  have  been 
lured  from  their  proper  task;  Taine,  Renan,  Sche"rer  would 
perhaps  have  found  it  more  difficult  to  secure  a  hearing.  It  was 
a  good  thing  for  Victor  Hugo  not  to  be  any  longer  a  Peer  of  the 
Realm  or  a  member  of  the  Legislative  Assembly:  his  political 

•  Cf.  Camille  Pelletan,  Victor  Hugo  hommc  politique.  Also  Ed.  Schemer. 
"  L'Ere  Impfiriale,"  Etudes  aur  la  Utt&ratwe  Contemporaine,  iv. 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  133 

duties  in  exile  were  light  and  intermittent;  they  left  his  energy 
intact  for  his  greatest  works.  The  period  of  the  Second  Empire 
is  by  no  means  the  most  brilliant  in  the  nineteenth  century,  but 
it  holds  an  honourable  rank.  It  would  be  ludicrous,  as  the 
Bonapartist  writer  Augustin  Filon  confesses,  to  speak  of  an 
"  Age  of  Napoleon  III " ;  it  would  be  an  injustice  to  call  the 
whole  period  barren,  and  to  make  the  regime  responsible  for 
such  sterility. 

Nor  is  it  any  more  exact  to  pretend  that  the  Empire  sought  to 
restrict  the  liberty  of  thought.  We  hold  no  brief  for  Bona- 
partism,  but  we  must  dwell  for  a  moment  on  this  point,  which 
of  course  is  of  commanding  interest  to  the  student  of  culture. 
Under  Napoleon  III  the  Press  was  not  free:  at  least,  pieces  of 
news  were  often  coloured  or  suppressed,  which  was  an  evil;  and 
scurrilous  abuse  was  sternly  discouraged,  much  to  the  benefit  of 
good  journalism :  masterpieces  of  allusive  irony,  in  the  style  of 
Prevost-Paradol,  are  all  too  rare  nowadays.  It  must  also  be 
said  that  Vacherot  lost  his  position  at  the  Normal  School, 
Michelet  and  Quinet  theirs  at  the  College  de  France,  that  Jules 
Simon  had  to  resign  after  the  coup  d'etat,  that  Taine's 
academic  life  was  made  intolerable,  that  Eenan's  course  was 
suspended  and  eventually  suppressed.  In  spite  of  all  these  facts, 
we  believe  that  in  all  essentials  thought  and  speech  were  as 
free  then  as  they  are  now.  The  regime  was  not  liberal;  but, 
materially  irresistible,  it  was  powerless  in  all  spiritual  affairs. 
The  thinking  classes  in  France  were  divided  into  radically 
opposed  camps,  each  too  strong  to  be  silenced  by  its  opponents, 
even  with  the  assistance  of  the  Government.  That  Government, 
being  a  hybrid,  a  monarchy  "  by  the  grace  of  God  and  the  will 
of  the  people,"  a  reactionary  power  of  revolutionary  origin,  could 
not  side  wholeheartedly  with  either  party;  and,  especially  after 
the  Italian  campaign,  it  frequently  sought  the  support  of  the 
free-thinkers  against  the  Church.  This  conflict  existed  even 
within  the  Imperial  family :  the  Empress  was  a  stanch  Catholic, 
Prince  Napoleon  was  "anti-clerical,"  the  Emperor  was  every- 
thing and  nothing.  As  a  result,  not  of  any  enlightened  tolerance 
on  the  part  of  the  rulers  but  of  conditions  beyond  the  reach  of 
any  political  regime,  thought,  especially  religious  thought,  was 


134     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

actually  freer  in  France  than  in  England,  where  the  liberty  of 
the  Press  was  officially  unbounded.  There,  writes  Hilaire 
Belloc,  "  a  sort  of  cohesive  public  spirit  glued  and  immobilized 
all  individual  expression.  One  could  float  imprisoned  as  in  a 
stream  of  thick  substance :  one  could  not  swim  against  it."  The 
French  public  spirit  was  not  cohesive:  the  Empire  had  no  con- 
sistent doctrine  which  it  might  attempt  to  impose  by  force. 

Such  was  the  political  background  at  home ;  *  with  foreign 
affairs  we  have  little  to  do,  except  in  one  respect:  the  Eoman 
question  was  ever  present  under  the  Empire;  it  marked  its 
beginning,  its  climax,  and  its  end;  it  reacted  on  home  politics, 
it  influenced  religion,  thought,  and  literature. 

Pope  Pius  IX  inaugurated  his  pontificate  with  liberal  reforms 
which  roused  the  enthusiasm  of  Europe;  he  seemed  destined  to 
be  the  evangelical,  democratic  Pope  after  the  heart  of  Lameunais 
and  Victor  Hugo;  his  popularity  had  much  to  with  the 
religious  attitude  of  the  Revolution  of  1848.  But  in  November, 
1848,  after  the  assassination  of  his  Minister  Rossi,  he  fled  to 
Gaeta,  and  a  Roman  Republic  was  created.  Cavaignac  held 
French  troops  in  readiness,  should  intervention  prove  necessary. 
It  was  part  of  the  compact  between  the  conservatives  and  Louis- 
Napoleon  that  these  troops  should  be  employed  to  restore  papal 
authority.  Thus  France,  still  nominally  a  Republic,  suppressed 
a  sister  Republic,  and  this  was  the  prelude  to  reaction  in  France 


•  For  seven  years  after  the  coup  d'Stat  the  Empire  remained  an  unmiti- 
gated autocracy  (1'Empire  Autorltaire).  Popular  elections  were  held  in 
1852,  1857,  and  1863,  but  the  Government,  undoubtedly  supported  by  the 
immense  majority  of  the  people,  repressed  even  the  mildest  forms  of  oppo- 
sition. From  1859,  and  especially  1863  to  1869,  we  can  trace  a  somewhat 
jerky  and  reluctant  progress  from  "  authority "  to  "  liberty "  (1'Empire 
Liberal).  The  Senatus-Consulte  of  September  8,  1869,  and  April  2,  1870, 
transformed  the  Empire  into  a  parliamentary  monarchy  of  the  English 
type.  However,  the  Emperor  remained  the  responsible  head  of  the  State, 
and  through  plebiscites  he  could  enter  into  direct  communication  with  the 
people  at  large,  over  the  heads  of  Ministers  and  deputies.  This  last  ava- 
tar of  the  regime,  submitted  to  popular  suffrage,  was  endorsed  by  over 
7,000,000  votes  against  1,500,000.  Emile  Ollivier,  the  new  Premier,  a  con- 
verted Republican  and  a  great  orator,  was  a  lover  of  peace  and  liberty, 
and  there  is  little  doubt  that  the  experiment  was,  on  the  whole,  satisfac- 
torily received.  The  tragic  adventure  of  1870  did  not  give  it  time  to 
fulfil  its  promises. 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  185 

herself,    "  a    Roman    expedition    at    home,"    in    the    words   of 
Montalembert. 

With  short  intermissions,  the  Pope  remained  under  the  pro- 
tection of  French  bayonets  until  after  the  fall  of  the  Empire. 
It  was  the  price  paid  by  Napoleon  for  the  support  of  the 
Church. 

The  price  must  often  have  seemed  heavy  to  him,  for  he  was 
at  heart  an  Italian  patriot,  had  taken  part  in  his  youth  in  an 
insurrection  against  papal  domination,  and  had  probably  been  a 
Carbon aro.  He  would  at  least  have  liked  to  use  his  influence 
for  securing  liberal  reforms  in  the  Roman  States ;  but  the  Pope, 
supported  by  the  French  conservatives,  refused  to  listen  to  any 
suggestion.  The  Emperor  was  "  caught " ;  he  could  not  with- 
draw his  troops,  for  that  would  have  weakened  his  position  in 
France  and  strengthened  that  of  Austria  in  Italy. 

In  1859  Napoleon  III,  after  secret  negotiations  with  Cavour, 
engaged  France  in  a  war  against  Austria  in  favour  of  Italian 
independence.  The  war  was  immensely  popular  with  the 
masses,  and  Napoleon  was  never  so  near  gaining  the  loyal 
support  of  the  Parisian  working  men;  the  revolutionary  Fau- 
bourg-Saint-Antoine  hailed  him  with  enthusiasm  as  he  left  for 
the  front. 

But  the  Franco-Italian  victory  opened  the  question  of  Italian 
unity.  In  spite  of  some  political  shilly-shallying,  Napoleon  did 
not  put  any  serious  obstacle  in  the  way  of  Piedmont,  and 
within  one  year  modern  Italy  was  made,  with  the  exception 
of  the  Venetian  province  and  what  remained  of  the  Pope's 
dominions. 

The  French  Catholics  held  the  Emperor  responsible  for  the 
partial  dispossession  of  their  pontiff.  Napoleon  was  attacked 
with  such  bitterness  that  he  had  to  suppress  the  great  Church 
paper,  L'Univers,  and  to  seek  for  supporters  among  the  more 
advanced  elements.  But  he  did  not  dare  to  change  the  whole 
basis  of  his  power;  he  tried  to  reconcile  his  sympathy  with  Italy 
and  the  Liberals  on  the  one  hand  with  his  traditional  alliance 
with  the  Church  on  the  other.  It  seems  now  proved,  as  Prince 
Napoleon  had  affirmed  long  ago,  that  the  Roman  question  alone 
prevented  Victor  Emmanuel  from  joining  the  French  side  in 


136     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

1870.*     A  fortnight  after  the  fall  of  the  Empire,  the  Italian 
troops  entered  Rome. 

For  twenty  years  Rome  was  the  pivot  of  French  politics, 
at  home  and  abroad.  For  ten  years  at  least  it  was  the  chief 
centre  of  interest  of  French  intellectual  life.  The  number  of 
books  and  pamphlets  which  it  elicited  is  prodigious.  The 
Roman  question  was  considered  as  a  test  of  conservatism  in 
all  things.  When  the  great  preacher  Lacordaire  became  a 
candidate  to  the  French  Academy,  Guizot,  a  Protestant,  Thiers, 
an  unbeliever,  objected  to  him  as  not  sufficiently  "  Roman." 
The  temporal  power  of  the  Pope  was  a  battleground  and  a 
symbol. 

§  3.  SOCIETY. 

§  3.  Society. — Documents :  literature ;  the  Press ;  graphic  documents 
— Material  activity:  the  Saint-Simonian  spirit — Solidity  of  this 
prosperity — Glitter. 

Old  French  society — The  exiles — The  Court — The  pleasure-seekers 
— "  L'homme  fort  "  ;  de  Morny. 

i  4.  Culture. — Reaction  and  materialism — Apparent  failure  of 
idealism — The  second  "  mal  du  sidcle  " — Gloom  not  due  to  the  prog- 
ress of  science  and  industry — Realism :  brilliancy  of  art  and  litera- 
ture— Science:  the  new  spirit — Positivism  and  evolution — Three  mo- 
ments: 1856,  1860,  1867. 

Of  social  conditions  under  the  Empire  we  shall  say  little, 
because  there  is  too  much  to  be  said.  The  period  still  lives  in 
the  memory  of  our  parents,  and  there  remains  a  mass  of 
historical  material  which  has  not  yet  been  sifted  and  classified. 
It  has  left  us  no  single  collection  of  documents  comparable 
in  value  to  Balzac's  Comedie  Humaine.  But  many  dramatists 
and  novelists  of  lesser  range  have  attempted  to  portray  their  own 
times  with  at  least  an  effort  towards  scientific  objectiveness  and 
accuracy.  The  plays  of  Augier,  Dumas,  Theodore  Barriere, 
Sardou,  Meilhac  and  Halevy  are  of  great  value  for  the  historian 
of  manners.  So  are,  if  due  caution  be  exercised,  some  novels 
of  the  Goncourts,  Feuillet,  Erckmann-Chatrian.  After  the  fall 
of  the  regime  we  had  Zola's  mighty  and  coarse  twenty-volume 
series,  Les  Rougon-Macquart :  a  sordid,  pessimistic,  one-sided 

•  Cf.  Bourgeois  and  Clermont,  Rome  and  Napoleon  III. 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  137 

view  of  life,  with  an  excessive  wealth  of  accurate  details,  and,  in 
spite  of  all  its  heaviness  and  vulgarity,  an  undeniable  breadth  of 
epic  treatment.  Less  powerful,  less  repulsive,  less  systematic, 
lighter,  truer,  finer,  are  Daudet's  somewhat  hasty  sketches, 
such  as  The  Nabob. 

The  newspapers  were  comparatively  few  on  account  of  the 
stringency  of  the  Press  law ;  but  they  maintained,  on  the  whole, 
a  very  high  standard:  Le  Journal  des  Debats,  the  organ  of 
the  liberal-conservative  opposition:  Le  Temps,  also  moderate 
in  tone,  but  more  advanced  than  the  Debats;  L'Univers  (for 
a  time  Le  Monde),  Veuillot's  ultra- Catholic  paper;  Havin's 
Siecle,  Voltairian,  bourgeois,  carrying  on  a  sort  of  licensed  semi- 
opposition;  Gueroult's  Opinion  Nationale,  tinged  with  Saint- 
Simonism,  democratic,  but  not  irreductibly  hostile  to  Bonapart- 
ism,  and  supposed  to  represent  the  ideas  of  Prince  Napoleon.  The 
official  Press  was  by  no  means  so  brilliant,  and  Le  Moniteur 
and  Le  Constitutionnel  are  at  present  remembered  only  on  account 
of  Saint-Beuve's  collaboration.  Among  the  reviews,  Buloz's 
Revue  des  Deux-Mondes  retained  its  primacy.  It  was,  like  Les 
Debats,  an  organ  of  the  parliamentary  opposition — Orleanist  or 
moderate  Republican.  But  it  was  rather  more  advanced,  and, 
in  philosophical  matters,  freely  open  to  bold  critics  of  the  Church 
or  even  of  Christianity :  Lanfrey,  Scherer,  Havet,  Eenan,  for 
instance,  were  among  its  contributors.  The  liberal  Catholics 
had  their  magazine,  Le  Correspondent,  with  de  Falloux, 
Moutalembert,  Pontmartin,  de  Laprade:  a  small  group,  but 
influential  in  Academic  elections. 

Beside  the  political  papers  and  the  great  magazines,  there 
swarmed  what  was  justly  called  "  la  petite  Presse,"  which,  de- 
barred from  treating  the  burning  questions  of  the  day,  enjoyed  on 
all  the  rest  almost  excessive  freedom.  It  gives  a  good  idea  of  one 
small  section  of  Parisian  society,  and  good  instances  of  one 
minor  aspect  of  Parisian  wit.  Le  Figaro  then  stood  almost 
at  the  limit  between  the  "  legitimate  "  and  the  "  small  "  Press. 
It  was  one  of  its  chroniclers,  Rochefort,  who,  by  applying  the 
methods  of  the  professional  humourist  to  political  matters  in  his 
weekly  Lanterne,  won  such  immediate  and  undeserved  popu- 
larity. Strange  to  say,  great  and  grave  men  were  occasional 


138     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

contributors  to  these  "  smart  set "  papers.  In  Aurelien  Scholl's 
Nain  Jaune  are  found  eloquent  and  intensely  earnest  criticisms 
of  contemporary  poets  by  Leconte  de  Lisle.  Taine  was  the 
personal  friend  of  Marcellin  (Planat),  the  founder  of  La  Vie 
Parisienne,  for  which  the  austere  philosopher  wrote  his  Thomas 
Graindorge.  In  La  Vie  Parisienne  can  be  seen  some  of  Con- 
stantin  Guys'  wonderful  sketches,  which,  with  the  spirited 
drawings  of  Gavarni,  Daumier,  and  Cham,  give  us  a  more  vivid 
idea  of  the  times  than  the  photographs  of  Nadar  and  Disderi, 
the  portraits  painted  by  Cabanel,  Flandrin  or  Winterhalter,  the 
large  historical  canvases  of  Yvon,  or  Meissonier's  brilliant 
miniatures. 

The  most  striking  character  of  this  society  was  the  intensity 
of  its  material  activity.  Industry  on  a  large  scale  had  developed 
under  Louis-Philippe,  but,  for  a  long  time,  at  a  moderate  pace. 
Under  the  Second  Empire  there  was  a  sudden,  and,  as  it  then 
seemed,  boundless  expansion.  The  trunk  lines  were  hastily 
completed  and  added  to ;  steam  navigation  was  developed ;  an 
ironclad  navy  created;  telegraphy  first  applied;  the  Suez  Canal 
commenced  and  completed,  mainly  as  a  French  undertaking. 
Most  of  the  great  cities  were  practically  rebuilt:  at  Marseilles, 
for  instance,  hills  were  levelled,  whole  districts  torn  down,  and 
a  new  harbour  conquered  on  the  Mediterranean.  The  best 
known,  the  most  spectacular  of  these  colossal  transformations 
was  that  of  Paris  under  Haussmann:  truly  a  formidable  work, 
hasty,  faulty  in  many  respects,  but  in  spite  of  errors — excesses 
and  shortcomings — one  of  the  wonders  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
More  actual  work  may  have  been  done  during  certain  years 
of  the  Third  Republic:  but  that  spirit  of  triumphant  material 
expansion — the  spirit  of  Bismarckian  Germany,  or  of  the 
American  North-West  at  the  present  day — no  longer  prevails 
in  contemporary  France. 

This  industrial  and  commercial  development  was  so  intense, 
so  exuberant,  that  it  assumed  a  sort  of  poetic  grandeur — the  epic 
of  productivity  and  wealth.  In  the  case  of  Napoleon  III 
himself,  materialism  had  undoubtedly  its  mystic  side,  and  there 
were  at  least  remnants  of  religious  enthusiasm  in  the  activities 
of  such  men  as  the  Pereires.  We  must  remember  that  the 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  189 

"  Neo-Christian  "  and  socialistic  disciples  of  Saint-Simon,  the 
very  men  whose  mania,  as  it  was  then  called,  had  amused  Paris 
in  1830-32,  were  believers  in  the  Gospel  of  Industry,  and 
at  the  time  of  the  Second  Empire  had  become  shrewd  and 
successful  business  men,  bankers,  and  railroad  magnates.  The 
Compagnie  Generate  Transatlantique,  with  the  Pereires,  re- 
mained for  a  long  time  one  of  their  strongholds.  Michel 
Chevallier,  the  economist  who  with  Cobden  secured  some 
measure  of  free-trade  between  France  and  England,  had  been 
a  Saint-Simonian ;  the  "  father  "  of  the  Church  himself,  Prosper 
Enfantin,  in  spite  of  incurable  illusions  mixed  with  charlatanism, 
was  a  capable  railroad  official  and  a  pioneer  promoter  of  the 
Suez  Canal.  There  is,  we  must  confess,  something  strangely 
attractive  about  the  material  activity  of  the  Empire :  its  reckless 
daring,  its  breadth  of  inspiration,  the  undeniable  generosity  of 
some  of  its  motives,  appeal  to  us  much  more  than  the  cautious 
solidity  of  Louis-Philippe. 

Much  of  the  material  prosperity  enjoyed  by  the  country  at 
large  was  the  reward  of  hard  work,  enterprise,  and  foresight. 
And  the  compressive  paternalism  of  the  Government  had  its 
counterpart  in  a  series  of  beneficent  measures.  The  "  Credit 
Foncier,"  a  national  mortgage  bank  imitated  everywhere,  was 
Napoleon's  earliest  creation.  Mutual  help  and  co-operative 
associations  were  encouraged.  Strikes  ceased  to  be  a  crime 
in  the  eyes  of  the  law.  Vast  stretches  of  marshy  territory  were 
reclaimed  in  Sologne  and  the  Dombes,  whilst  the  desolate 
Landes  of  Gascony  became  a  huge  plantation  of  pine.  Re- 
afforestation was  carried  on  with  efficient  energy.  New  breeds 
of  horses  and  cattle  were  introduced.  Local  and  national  agri- 
cultural expositions  contributed  to  the  spread  of  better  methods 
of  cultivation.  Taine  was  not  a  Bonapartist,  and  when  not 
blinded  by  political  passion  he  was  a  keen  observer :  after  exten- 
sive journeys  througli  the  length  and  the  breadth  of  the  land,  his 
verdict  was:  "  One  must  confess  there  is  in  this  country  a  sudden 
expansion  of  public  prosperity,  similar  to  that  of  the  Renascence 
or  of  the  time  of  Colbert.  .  .  .  The  Emperor  understands  France 
and  his  century  better  than  any  of  his  predecessors."  * 

•  Cornets  de  Voyage,  p.  112   (1863). 


140     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

This  prosperity  was  by  no  means  all  glitter:  the  way  in  which 
the  country  recovered  after  1870  showed  that  the  economic 
conditions  were  fundamentally  sound.  Nothing,  therefore,  would 
be  more  unjust  than  to  see  in  the  Second  Empire  a  regime 
of  stockjobbers,  card-sharpers,  swashbucklers,  and  prostitutes. 
But  there  was  much  glitter  and  many  dark  points.  To  Guizot's 
advice  under  Louis-Philippe,  "  Get  rich ! "  the  Second  Empire 
seemed  to  add :  "  And  get  rich  quickly !  "  The  whole  regime 
seemed  to  be  the  fruit  of  successful  gambling:  penniless  adven- 
turers found  themselves  at  one  stroke  among  the  rulers  of  France. 
The  spirit  of  recklessness,  luxury,  and  pleasure  was  evident  every- 
where, and  displayed  itself  with  a  universality  and  a  cynicism 
unrivalled  except  under  the  Regency  and  the  Directoire. 
"  Imperial  corruption "  has  remained  a  by-word,  and  even 
after  discounting  the  natural  hostility  of  Republican  and  Royalist 
historians,  there  is  much  truth  in  the  censure.  The  bourgeois 
regimes  of  Louis-Philippe  and  Victoria  had  their  own  sad  and 
sordid  tales  to  tell,  it  is  true:  immorality  was  invented  several 
thousand  years  before  the  Empire.  The  Government,  aware  of 
the  evil,  would  offer  rewards  to  edifying  literature,  and  prose- 
cuted Madame  B ovary,  which,  to  the  jaded  taste  of  our  own 
times,  seems  only  a  distressing  but  salutary  book.  All  efforts 
were  in  vain ;  the  taint  would  spread  instead  of  receding. 

Old  French  society,  of  course,  was  not  dead.  In  the  noble 
Faubourg-Saint-Germain,  Legitimists  and  Orleanists,  partly 
reconciled  through  their  common  opposition  to  the  Government, 
waged  against  it  their  clever  and  harmless  warfare  of  epigrams, 
allusions,  and  academic  intrigues.  Even  they  were  not  wholly 
untainted  by  the  Parisian  atmosphere:  Veuillot  complains  that 
the  balls  in  Catholic  aristocratic  families  were  reported  in  terms 
better  fitting  for  a  description  of  Mabille ;  spirit-rapping  stances 
were  given — the  craze  gained  even  Lacordaire — and  vaudeville 
stars  like  Theresa  gave  performances  in  the  homes  of  the  old 
nobility.  Yet  on  the  whole,  and  even  in  Paris,  these  conserva- 
tive elements  represented  at  least  some  traditions  of  dignity  and 
honour.  In  the  provinces  they  had  kept  purer:  Veuillot's 
correspondence  affords  us  an  occasional  glimpse  of  an  honest, 
narrow,  delightful  world  of  simple-hearted  village  priests  and 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  1*1 

country  squires,  fond  of  an  innocent  pun,  a  good  song,  and  a 
bottle,  not  brilliantly  clever,  but  sound  to  the  core.  But  these 
great  conservative  forces  either  kept  aloof  from  the  Empire 
or  supported  it  blindly,  without  exerting  any  social  influence  of 
national  importance. 

Napoleon  III  lacked  the  support  of  another  great  moral 
power:  that  of  the  earnest  democrats,  either  exiled  or  held 
in  suspicion  for  their  loyalty  to  a  noble  ideal.  Hugo,  Q.uinet, 
Charras,  seemed  the  incarnation  of  Right  and  Justice  persecuted 
by  tyranny.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  France  was  freely  opened 
to  them  after  1859,  and  the  "  tyranny  "  was  but  the  expression 
of  the  national  will.  Yet  the  irreconcilable  opposition  of  these 
men  was  for  the  regime  a  constant  source  of  moral  weakness. 

The  room  which  was  thus  left  empty  was  hastily  filled  by 
a  few  deserving  men  and  many  questionable  characters.  The 
Imperial  Court  itself  was  brilliant  rather  than  select.  Napoleon 
III,  a  prince  every  inch  of  him,  but  spoilt  by  an  adventurous 
career,  bound  to  early  companions  and  accomplices,  and  with  a 
slightly  blurred  sense  of  the  sanctity  of  his  marriage  vows,  was 
not  able  to  give  his  Court  a  high  moral  tone.  The  Empress,  for 
all  her  piety  and  haughtiness,  for  all  her  real  strength  and 
dignity,  was  capricious,  and  often  gave  herself  the  airs  of  an 
irresponsible  woman  of  fashion.  Both  were,  in  a  different 
sense,  "  parvenus "  and  cosmopolitans.  Imperial  Paris  was 
full  of  "  distinguished  "  foreign  visitors,  diplomatists,  refugees, 
pleasure-seekers,  among  whom  not  a  few  were  "  rastaquoueres." 
The  representatives  of  the  oldest  and  most  dignified  Courts  did 
not  always  set  the  best  example :  the  Princess  of  Metternich  was 
noted  for  her  passion  for  social  amusements.  The  form  of  enter- 
tainment which  remained  typical  of  the  period  was  the  fancy- 
dress  -  ball,  so  favourable  to  loud  taste,  lavish  display,  and 
excessive  freedom  of  speech  and  manners.  Amid  the  gaudy 
splendours  of  the  new  regime,  one  would  sometimes  regret  the 
bourgeois  Court  of  Louis-Philippe,  whither,  history  gravely 
reports,  haberdashers  and  their  spouses  would  repair  in.  an 
omnibus. 

Below  this  brilliant  set,  to  whose  follies  title,  office,  or  wit 
still  lent  some  distinction,  others  were  found,  less  gracefully 


142     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

cynical,  more  heavily  frivolous — the  newest  rich,  hankers,  con- 
tractors, manufacturers,  the  men  who  had  helped  reconstruct 
Paris,  complete  the  network  of  railroads,  finance  all  the  great 
undertakings.  That  was  a  mixed  class,  in  which  ranked  foreign 
Jews,  bourgeois  of  good  old  stock,  peasants  come  to  the  metro- 
polis "in  their  wooden  shoes."  Much  lower,  adventurers, 
bohemians,  gamblers  and  jobbers  of  all  kinds,  d'Estrigauds 
and  Giboyers;  in  the  lowest  depths,  yet  loud,  patent,  assertive, 
a  perpetual  world's  fair,  a  professional  carnival  for  the  chance 
visitor,  the  virtuous  country  cousin,  the  foreigner  anxious  to 
denounce,  after  experience,  the  vices  of  the  modern  Babylon. 
These  circles  existed,  and  still  exist,  in  all  modern  capitals; 
but  in  Imperial  Paris  they  shaded  off  into  one  another  in  subtle 
and  unexpected  ways.  All  were  whirling  in  a  feverish  round 
of  pleasure,  ever  more  rapid,  dizzier,  more  maddening,  aptly 
described  by  Meilhac  and  Halevy  in  La  Vie  Parisienne,  and 
symbolized  by  Carpeaux's  wonderful  group  before  the  Opera : 
dancing  Bacchants,  drunk  with  music  and  motion,  and,  in  the 
centre,  the  mysterious,  haunting  figure  of  a  Genius,  tense, 
Mephistophelian,  yet  with  the  wistfulness  of  higher  things. 

The  hero  of  this  society  was  "  1'homme  fort,"  the  strong 
man — a  sceptical,  heartless,  and  unscrupulous  man  of  pleasure 
and  business.  De  Morny,  Napoleon's  illegitimate  half-brother, 
was  the  ideal  "  homme  fort."  Cool,  elegant,  superior ;  a  Don 
Juan  who  gambled  on  the  stock  market  and  held  all  political 
wires  in  his  hand;  a  wit,  an  epicure,  a  leader  of  fashion,  who 
affected  to  treat  a  matter  of  State  in  a  careless,  disdainful 
manner  and  to  concentrate  his  mind  on  a  farce,  a  menu,  or 
a  cravat,  he  was  one  of  the  worst  and  one  of  the  most  fas- 
cinating men  in  the  century.  Sane,  liberal,  tactful,  courteous 
when  he  chose,  he  made  an  admirable  President  of  the  Legis- 
lative Body;  at  the  same  time,  cruel  in  cold  blood,  he  was 
probably  responsible  for  the  worst  features  of  the  coup  d'etat; 
corrupt  to  the  core,  he  sold  his  influence  to  Jecker  for  a  few 
millions,  and  thus  got  his  country  entangled  in  the  senseless 
and  ruinous  Mexican  war.  Luckier  than  more  deserving  men, 
he  died  in  the  heyday  of  the  regime  he  had  founded,  served, 
and  di8hQn.ouredA  His  life  was  like  his  birth — splendid,  but  with 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  143 

a  bar  sinister.*  In  literature,  we  have  a  number  of  "  hommes 
forts."  The  two  extreme  types  are  perhaps  Monsieur  de 
Camors,  slightly  idealized,  who  retains  not  only  tact  and  taste, 
but  a  sense  of  honour,  and  a  heart  open  to  a  great  passion, 
and  d'Estrigaud,  one  of  the  deepest-dyed  villains  that  ever 
graced  the  French  stage. 

§  4.  CULTURE. 

The  Second  Republic  after  June,  1848,  and  the  Second  Empire 
from  beginning  to  end,  form  a  period  of  reaction,  characterized 
by  pessimism  and  materialism.  The  Government  rested  on 
brutal  force — either  the  sheer  might  of  bayonets,  or  the  no  less 
unreasoning  power  of  the  masses,  directly  represented  by  one 
man  and  drowning  the  voice  of  the  elite.  It  was  neither 
democracy  nor  monarchy  by  divine  right,  but  an  empirical 
hybrid,  meant  to  restore  and  preserve  material  order.  The 
world  of  production  was  industrialized;  the  working  man  lost 
his  individuality;  the  personal  relations,  the  almost  familial 
bonds,  the  sense  of  responsibility  and  loyalty  between  employer 
and  employee  were  vanishing;  fast  disappearing  also  was  the 
old  spirit  of  the  good  craftsman,  who  was  not  a  machine  or 
the  servant  of  a  machine,  but  an  artisan,  almost  an  artist,  proud 
of  his  traditions,  of  his  tools,  of  his  skill.  The  power  of  the 
Church  was  greater  than  ever,  but  it  was  as  a  bulwark  of  reaction. 
Spurious  miracles,  degrading  superstitions,  the  crushing  out 
of  every  velleity  of  liberalism,  the  scurrilous  tone  of  the  Catholic 
Press,  the  dictatorship  of  a  powerful  but  vulgar  journalist, 
Veuillot,  war  declared  on  modern  civilization  by  the  Syllabus, 
Papal  Infallibility  proclaimed  by  the  Council  of  the  Vatican — 
these  were  so  many  signs  of  the  hardening,  materializing, 
coarsening  influences  at  work  within  Catholicism.  In  art  reigned 
realism,  and  Flaubert's  novels,  with  their  minute  notation  of 
sordid  details,  are  typical  of  the  prevailing  state  of  mind;  in 
science,  the  experimental  method;  in  philosophy,  positivism,  not 
even  the  positivism  of  Comte,  in  which  mystic  elements  were  not 
lacking,  but  the  unvarnished  materialistic  agnosticism  of  Littre. 

•  Cf.  Frederic  Loli6e,   Le  Due  de  Moray;  Alphonse   Daudet,   Le  Nabab 
(Daudet  had  been  one  of  the  Duke's  under-secretaries). 


144     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

This  reaction  was  due,  first  of  all,  to  the  apparent  failure 
of  idealism  in  all  its  forms.  For  eighteen  years  the  political 
principles  so  ably  defended  by  the  austere  doctrinaire  Guizot, 
and  the  natural  religion  of  the  eloquent  eclecticist  Cousin,  had 
been  used  as  a  mask  by  a  small  and  selfish  class,  whose 
hypocrisy  France  had  long  found  out.  No  wonder  the  French 
shrugged  their  shoulders  when  "  liberty "  or  "  the  true,  the 
beautiful,  and  the  good "  *  were  mentioned.  The  religious 
exaltation  of  the  Saint-Simonians  and  the  liberal  Catholics 
had  led  to  nothing.  Romanticism  in  literature  had  grown 
tiresome  before  1848;  romanticism  in  politics,  or  Utopian 
socialism,  had  come  to  a  tragic  end  in  June,  1848.  Doctrines 
and  principles,  as  well  as  flights  of  fancy  or  gushes  of  emotion, 
had  all  proved  deceptive.  So  the  cry  was  for  "  facts,  facts, 
facts,"  as  the  only  true  guides.  At  any  rate,  this  materialistic 
age,  except  in  the  case  of  the  shallowest  of  its  representatives 
like  About,  did  not  fall  into  the  damning  sin  of  self-satisfaction. 
It  preserved  in  its  positivism  the  haunting  regret  of  vanished 
dreams:  hence  the  melancholy  or  despair  of  all  thinkers  and 
poets — of  Flaubert,  Leconte  de  Lisle,  Madame  Ackermann, 
Amiel,  Taine.  It  is  the  second  "  mal  du  siecle,"  less  vague, 
less  sentimental,  and  deeper  than  the  first. 

With  this  disenchantment  of  the  French  mind  coincided  a 
sudden  expansion  of  material  activity,  due  to  the  creation  of 
railroads,  popular  banking,  large  public  works,  and  all  the 
economic  instruments  of  the  modern  world.  On  account  of  this 
coincidence,  material  progress  was  often  made  responsible  for 
the  harsh  and  cynical  tone  of  the  time.  This  is  only  partly 
true.  The  arraignment  of  locomotives  as  agents  of  demoraliza- 
tion and  vulgarization  is  sheer  nonsense.  Were  men  guided 
by  a  living  faith,  they  would  bless  the  locomotive  as  a  good 
and  faithful  servant.  It  was  not  prosperity  that  bred  scepticism 
and  cynicism;  it  was  pre-existing  disenchantment  that  checked 
or  darkened  the  joy  men  would  naturally  have  felt  in  material 
progress.  The  time  of  the  Reformation  was  also  one  of 
economic  expansion,  and  Ulrich  von  Hiitten  cried :  "  0  tem- 

•  Title  of  Cousin's  famous  book,  a  popular  epitome  of  the  philosophy  he 
had  been  preaching  for  thirty  years. 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  145 

pora !  0  seculum !  es  1st  cine  Lust  zu  leben ! "  The  same 
holds  true  of  science.  Darwinism  did  not  make  the  world 
meaner  or  sadder;  the  world,  morally  depressed  by  other  causes, 
interpreted  Darwinism  in  terms  of  its  own  pessimism. 

All  this,  however,  is  but  the  dark  side  of  the  picture.  In- 
dustrialism, fostered  by  the  Imperial  Government,  increased  the 
material  comfort  of  the  working  classes  and  led  to  a  wider 
diffusion  of  education.  There  was  much  that  was  harsh  and 
gloomy  in  realistic  art  and  literature;  yet  we  must  remember 
that  the  greatest  names  in  1860  are  hardly  less  famous  than 
those  of  the  glorious  generation  of  1830.  In  art  we  have  the 
great  sculptor,  Carpeaux ;  admirable  landscape  painters, 
Theodore  Rousseau,  Daubigny,  Dupre ;  Courbet  and  Manet, 
the  most  typically  naturalistic;  and  the  two  extremes,  Corot, 
so  full  of  poetic  grace,  Millet,  with  his  quiet  and  almost  tragic 
simplicity.*  Lefuel  and  Visconti  were  not  unequal  to  the  task 
of  completing  the  Louvre,  and  Charles  Garnier's  Grand  Opera 
has  been  imitated  all  over  the  world.  In  literature,  besides 
the  great  survivors  of  romanticism,  Hugo,  Michelet,  George 
Sand,  Dumas  pere,  Gautier,  de  Vigny,  we  have  Flaubert, 
Leconte  de  Lisle,  Augier,  Dumas  fils,  Baudelaire,  Banville, 
Veuillot,  the  Goncourts,  Meilhac  and  Halevy,  a  list  of  which 
any  time  or  nation  would  be  proud.  Criticism,  and  history 
based  on  criticism  rather  than  on  imaginative  sympathy,  were 
perhaps  the  most  typical  products  of  the  realistic  age;  then 
it  was  that  Sainte-Beuve  completed  his  Port-Royal  and  wrote 
his  Monday  Talks,  Taine  his  Essays  and  his  English  Liierar 
ture,  Eenan  his  Studies  and  the  first  volumes  of  his  Origins 
of  Christianity. 

But  science  was  the  chief  glory  of  the  time.  There  had  been 
periods  when  France  could  boast  as  many  glorious  names  in  the 
scientific  field;  the  first  quarter  of  the  century,  in  this  respect 
was  fully  equal  to  the  third.  But  under  Napoleon  I  science 
was  merely  one  of  the  branches  of  human  activity,  co-ordinate 
with  others — literature,  philosophy,  religion.  Under  Napoleon  III 
the  absolute  supremacy  of  science  was  evident.  Literature 

•  Beside  a  host  of  other  artists,  Cabanel,  Paul  Baudry,  Ribot,  Fromen- 
tin,  Troyon,  Henri  Renault,  etc. 


146     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-ra  CENTURY 

with  Flaubert,  criticism  with  Sainte-Beuve,  philosophy  with 
Comte,  Littre,  Taine,  religion  with  Eenan,  bowed  before  the 
scientific  spirit. 

This  scientific  spirit  was  no  longer  the  same  as  during  the 
eighteenth  century  and  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth.  Its 
ideal  was  no  longer  mathematical,  mechanical,  or  static,  but 
organic  and  dynamic.  The  notion  of  absolute  and  simple  laws, 
analogous  to  geometrical  axioms,  and  from  which  consequences 
could  be  deduced  by  a  logical  process,  had  been  supplemented 
by  the  idea  of  adaptation  and  growth — in  a  word,  of  evolution. 
This  idea  was  not  introduced  by  Darwin;  the  inception  and 
success  of  Darwinism  on  the  contrary  were  a  sign  of  the  times. 
The  fearless  criticism  of  the  eighteenth  century,  the  commotions 
of  the  Revolutionary  Age,  the  philosophical  efforts  of  Kant  and 
Hegel,  had  shaken  the  faith  of  men  in  the  old  absolute  authori- 
ties. Universal  relativism,  the  constant  flux  of  phenomena,  the 
"category  of  becoming"  were  substituted  for  eternal  stability, 
the  "  category  of  being."  In  the  words  of  Eenan,  the  study 
of  any  subject  became  the  history  of  that  subject.  Now  the 
historical  spirit  was  the  chief  contribution  of  the  Romantic  Age 
to  culture.  Childish  though  it  might  seem  to  the  following 
generation,  the  love  of  Hugo  and  Dumas  for  vanished  civiliza- 
tions and  local  colouring  was  an  early  striving  towards  the 
doctrine  of  evolution. 

The  chief  difference  between  the  Romantic  spirit  and  the 
scientific  spirit  of  1850  is  one  of  method.  Romanticism  was 
essentially  subjective.  Positivism  studies  the  facts  of  nature 
objectively.  Sainte-Beuve,  Taine,  and  later  Zola,  pretended 
to  be  "  naturalists,"  "  physiologists."  Observations,  and, 
whenever  possible,  experimentation,  are  the  main  avenues  to 
knowledge.  Leverrier's  mathematical  discovery  of  Neptune  in 
1846  was,  in  popular  imagination,  the  last  and  most  brilliant 
achievement  of  abstract  science,  based  on  logic  and  mathe- 
matics ;  the  new  type  of  scientists  are  men  like  Claude  Bernard, 
the  physiologist,  Berthelot,  and  especially  Pasteur,  the  chemists, 
who  are  indefatigable  laboratory  workers. 

Public  opinion,  in  France  and  abroad,  has  not  yet  learned 
to  judge  the  Empire  fairly.  After  eighteen  years  of  insolent 


NAPOLEON  III,  1848-70  147 

prosperity,  it  ended  in  disaster:  Vce  victis!  But  it  would  be 
a  slander  on  human  nature  to  maintain  that  a  great  nation  was 
duped,  bribed,  or  cowed  into  submission,  for  eighteen  years, 
by  an  utterly  worthless  regime.  The  Second  Empire  had  its 
moments  of  genuine  usefulness  and  legitimate  splendour. 

If  we  want  to  see  it  at  the  zenith  of  its  power,  we  should 
consider  it  in  the  years  1855-56,  blindly  supported  at  home, 
triumphant  abroad,  still  in  the  freshness  of  its  hopes  and 
enthusiasm,  strengthened  by  the  success  of  the  Exposition  and 
the  birth  of  the  Prince  Imperial.  In  1860  the  picture  is  even 
more  brilliant;  a  second  victorious  war,  more  popular  than  the 
first,  and  led  by  the  Emperor  himself;  new  provinces  added 
to  France;  the  working  classes  almost  reconciled;  a  general 
amnesty  extended  to  political  offenders.  But  there  was  one 
dark  side  to  this  picture:  the  Roman  imbroglio.  In  1867  we 
have  a  mixture  of  splendour  and  misery  which  struck  even  the 
contemporaries  and  remains  typical  of  the  whole  period.  The 
reconstruction  of  Paris,  in  its  main  lines,  was  completed;  the 
Exposition,  admirably  planned  by  Le  Play,  was  a  great  success. 
Princes,  kings,  emperors,  entertained  three  and  five  at  a  time, 
seemed  to  pay  their  court  to  their  overlord.  Wealth  and 
strength  were  manifest  everywhere.  Yet  there  was  gloom  in 
all  that  magnificence,  as  in  a  golden  autumnal  landscape.  The 
Emperor  prematurely  old  and  sick;  abroad,  Sadowa,  Luxem- 
bourg, Queretaro,  a  series  of  rebuffs  and  disasters;  at  home, 
the  growing  alienation  of  the  Catholics,  the  irreconcilable  and 
threatening  attitude  of  the  new  generation.  The  new  Paris 
was  fine,  but  its  creator,  Haussmann,  would  soon  have  to  be 
sacrificed  for  confessed  extravagance  and  suspected  peculation; 
the  Exposition  showed  immense  industrial  development,  but 
it  was  "surrounded  with  pleasure  resorts  which  made  material 
progress  seem  futile  or  even  dangerous.  Everywhere  a  sense 
of  uneasy  satiety,  of  restless  torpor,  of  undefinable  dread. 
Hello,  the  prophet,  wondered  that  the  Tuileries  were  not  yet 
ablaze  and  that  the  Barbarians  should  so  long  delay  their 
coming.  The  splendours  of  1867  are  still  unforgotten,  but 
to  thoughtful  contemporaries  they  seemed  entrancing  and  op- 
pressive, like  some  gorgeous  and  feverish  dream. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

TAXILB  DBLORD.  Histoire  du  Second  Empire.  8  vols.  8vo.  Bailliere 
[Alcan].  1868-75.  (Journalistic  in  thought  and  style,  but  of  some 
value  as  a  contemporary  document.  The.  same  is  true  of  Larousse's 
Grand  Dictionnaire  Universel.) 

P.  DE  LA  GORGE.  Histoire  de  la  Seconde  Rfipublique.  2  vols.  8vo.  Plon, 
1887 ;  and  Histoire  du  Second  Empire.  7  vols.  8vo.  Plon.  1894- 
1905.  (An  admirable  piece  of  work  not  sufficiently  known.  Some- 
what wordy  and  decidedly  conservative.) 

EMILB  OLUVIBR.  L'Empire  Liberal.  Gamier,  from  1894.  (Most  of  the 
chapters  appeared  in  the  Revise  des  Deux-Mondea.  A  personal  apol- 
ogy, unreliable,  but  of  commanding  interest.) 

A.  THOMAS.  Histoire  Socialiste:  Le  Second  Empire.  Rouff.  (One  of  the 
best  volumes  in  that  popular  series.  Hasty  and  partisan,  yet  schol- 
arly and  often  illuminating. ) 

[Professor  C.  SEIGNOBOS  is  preparing  a  Political  History  of  the  Second 
Empire  which  cannot  fail  to  be  exceedingly  valuable.] 

EMILB  AUGIER.     DUMAS  flls.     Theatre  Complet.     6  and  8  vols.     Levy. 

E.  ZOLA.  Les  Rougon-Macquart,  Histoire  Naturelle  et  Sociale  d'une  Fa- 
mille  sous  le  Second  Empire.  20  vols.  Charpentier,  Paris.  1871-93. 

PARIS-GUIDE.  2  vols.  Lacroix.  1867.  (Preface  by  Victor  Hugo.  Con- 
tributions by  all  the  prominent  writers  of  the  day.) 


148 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE 

IV.  SECOND  REPUBLIC  AND  SECOND  EMPIRE,  l&fi-IO. 

1848  February  22-24.     The  Revolution  of  February.     Second  Republic. 

Provisional  Government  (Lamartine). 

May  4.     Constituent  Assembly. 

June  23-26.     The  Days  of  June.     Cavalgnac  Dictator. 

November.     Constitution  promulgated. 

December  10.     Louis-Napoleon  elected  President  (proclaimed  De- 
cember 20). 

1849  April  to  August.     Roman  Expedition.     Reaction  in  France. 
May.     Legislative  Assembly  (Conservative). 

1851  December  2.     Coup  d'Etat. 

December  20.     Coup  d'Etat  confirmed  by  Plebiscite. 

1852  December  2.     Napoleon  III,  Emperor  of  the  French. 

1853  Marries  Eugenie  de  Monti  jo  y  Teba. 

1854-56  Crimean  War.     Siege  of  Sebastopol.     Treaty  of  Paris. 

1855  Exposition. 

1856  Birth  of  the  Prince  Imperial. 

1858  Attempt  of  Orsinl  on  the  life  of  the  Emperor.     Napoleon  and 

Cavour  prepare  the — 

1859  War    against    Austria.      (Magenta.     Solferino.     Peace    of    Villa- 

f  ranca. ) 

1860  Nice  and  Savoy  joined  to  Franc*. 
1860-64  Liberal  Evolution  of  the  Empire. 
1861-67  Mexican  Expedition. 

1867  Exposition. 

Luxembourg  Question.     Queretaro. 

1869  Constitutional   Evolution.     General  Elections. 

1870  January  2.     Liberal  Ministry   (Emilie  Ollivier). 
May  8.     Constitutional  Reforms  ratified  by  Plebiscite. 
July  15.     Declaration  of  Franco-Prussian  War. 
September  1.     Battle  of  Sedan. 

September  4.     Fall  of  the  Empire. 
[1873  January  9.     Death  of  Napoleon  III.] 


149 


CHAPTER   V 
THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870—1913 

§    1.  THE  "TERRIBLE  YEAR/'  1870-71. 

§  1.  The  Terrible  Year,  1870-71 — Causes  of  the  Franco-German  War 
— The  principle  of  nationalities — The  policy  of  compensations  or 
"  tips " — Responsibility  of  the  whole  nation  in  the  declaration, 
preparation,  and  conduct  of  the  war — Sedan — Fall  of  the  Empire. 

Government  of  National  Defence — Trochu — Gambetta — Fall  of 
Paris — Peace — National  Assembly. 

The  Commune:  causes,  character,  evolution — Repression — Influ- 
ence. 

|  2.  Recuperation.  Foundation  of  the  Republic.  Conquest  of  the 
Republic  by  the  Republicans. — Financial  recuperation:  Thiers  and 
the  liberation  of  the  territory — Public  works — Military  and  diplo- 
matic recovery — 1878 :  the  Exposition  and  the  Berlin  Congress ; 
France  resumes  her  position. 

Constitutional  reconstruction:  monarchical  majority,  but  divided 
— MacMahon — Legitimist  Pretender  refuses  to  compromise — Con- 
stitution of  1876  :  provisional  and  "  omnibus." 

The  crisis  of  the  16th  of  May,  1877 — Failure  of  the  Conservatives 
— Resignation  of  MacMahon — Conquest  of  the  Republic  by  the  Re- 
publicans. 

WE  do  not  believe  in  the  fatalistic  delusion  of  "  inevitable  wars," 
but  we  must  confess  that  no  conflict  was  ever  more  difficult  to 
avert  than  that  between  France  and  Prussia.  "  From  the  day 
of  Sadowa  the  two  nations  were  like  two  locomotives  rushing 
towards  each  other  on  a  single  track."  All  parties  in  France 
and  all  generations,  the  old  monarchy,  the  Republic,  the  Empire, 
held  that  the  Rhine,  the  north-eastern  boundary  of  ancient 
Gaul,  should  by  right  be  that  of  France.  This  vague  dream 
of  centuries  had  become  a  reality  from  1795  to  1814.  In  the 
minds  of  the  French  the  annexation  of  the  Rhine  provinces  was 
not  an  ordinary  conquest  nor  even  the  resumption  of  a  lost 
150 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  151 

domain,  but  the  free  reunion  of  brothers:  for  the  France  of 
1795  meant,  ideally,  liberty,  equality,  and  fraternity.  It  must 
be  said  that  the  local  population  did  not  offer  any  resistance, 
and  that  for  twenty  years  the  Republic  and  the  Empire  had  no 
more  loyal  citizens  and  no  more  devoted  soldiers  than  the 
Rhinelanders.  Hypnotized  by  the  memories  of  that  period, 
democrats,  humanitarians,  pacifists  like  Hugo  and  Quinet,  still 
cherished  the  belief  that  France  would  some  day  tear  up  the 
hateful  treaties  of  Vienna  and  reconquer  her  "  natural  frontiers," 

Germany,  on  the  other  hand,  after  a  long  eclipse  and  a  whole 
century  of  upward  efforts,  had  at  last  grown  to  the  full  conscious- 
ness of  her  national  unity.  She  would  not  any  longer  be  the 
favourite  battlefield  of  all  the  princes  in  Europe;  she  would  not 
allow  any  more  part  of  Deutschtum  to  be  distracted  from  the 
common  fatherland;  nay,  turning  her  eyes  back  to  the  time  of 
her  glory,  before  the  century  of  religious  wars,  she  wanted  her 
lost  provinces  to  return  to  the  ancestral  home:  and  by  this 
Alsace  was  meant.  The  Minister  of  Strasbourg  was  a  national 
heirloom,  the  loss  of  which  in  1681  was  deeply  felt  even  by  the 
disunited,  oppressed,  and  decadent  Germany  of  that  time. 

Thus  the  ambitions  of  France  and  those  of  Germany  were  in 
conflict.  It  would  have  taken  patience  rather  than  cunning  and 
generous  sympathy  rather  than  force  to  compose  these  differences 
and  allay  these  inveterate  suspicions.  The  two  countries,  for- 
getting mediaeval  dreams  and  obsolete  traditions,  should  have 
realized  that  within  the  last  hundred  years  the  debatable  border- 
lands between  them  had  become  culturally  assimilated  to  their 
respective  masters.  The  Rhine  provinces,  indifferent  to  German 
unity  in  1815  and  in  closer  sympathy  with  Paris  than  with 
Berlin,  had  become  as  patriotic  as  any  part  of  the  Confederacy.* 
Alsace  had  preserved  her  Teutonic  vernacular,  but  she  had  gone 
through  the  new  birth  of  the  Revolution  with  the  rest  of  France 
and  was  now  French  to  the  core. 

Napoleon  III  might  have  been  the  instrument  of  this  difficult 
reconciliation :  it  was  in  harmony  with  his  sentiments  and  .his 
principles.  He  hated  war:  war  was  contrary  to  his  Saint- 

•  Cf.  an  admirable  presentation  of  this  development  in  Clara  Viebig's 
novel,  Wacht  am  Rhein. 


152     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

Simonian  ideal  of  industrial  productivity  and  abhorrent  to  his 
heart,  whose  kindness  no  qualified  witness  has  ever  challenged. 
He  was  sincere  when  he  proclaimed  in  October,  1852 :  "  The 
Empire  means  peace."  The  horrible  spectacle  of  the  battlefield 
of  Solferino  was  one  of  the  causes  that  led  him  to  end  the 
Italian  campaign  in  such  an  abrupt  and  unsatisfactory  manner. 
His  foreign  policy  was  based  on  the  principle  of  nationalities: 
all  ethnic  or  historical  groups  which  wanted  to  live  free  and 
united  under  their  own  flag  should  be  allowed  to  do  so  after  ex- 
pressing their  desire  through  plebiscites :  a  wise  and  generous  con- 
ception, which  is  irresistibly  coming  into  its  own,  in  spite  of  the 
jeers  of  fledgeling  Machiavellis  and  would-be  Metternichs.  In  this 
respect  Napoleon  III  will  some  day  be  honoured  as  a  precursor. 
Unfortunate!}',  he  was  not  understood,  and  he  was  not  even 
free  to  act.  The  irony  of  fate  had  made  that  humanitarian 
utopist,  that  "  man  of  ?48,"  the  heir  of  a  despotic  military 
tradition  and  the  captive  leader  of  the  conservatives.  An  upstart 
sovereign,  he  was  bound  to  be  constantly  and  brilliantly  success- 
ful or  lose  his  power  as  suddenly  as  he  had  conquered  it.  Now, 
France,  whose  unity  had  long  been  completed,  had  nothing  to 
gain  by  the  principle  of  nationalties  and  was  bound  to  lose  in 
relative  importance  if  Italy  and  Germany  became  powerful 
national  units.  Napoleon  could  not  further  his  dreams  of  a 
new  Europe  based  on  justice  and  peace  without  apparent  dis- 
loyalty to  his  own  country.  This  inner  conflict,  the  hesitancy 
and  haziness  of  purpose  peculiar  to  the  Imperial  Hamlet,  the 
underground  methods  inured  in  him  by  twenty  years  of  constant 
plotting,  made  his  policy  an  inextricable  puzzle,  which  satisfied 
no  one  and  threatened  everybody.  He  was  driven  by  the 
pressure  of  public  opinion  to  stipulate  for  what  Bismarck  bluntly 
called  "  tips " :  Nice  and  Savoy  were  the  price  of  his  aid  to 
Italy;  Mainz,  Luxembourg,  Belgium  were  to  be  the  price  of 
his  friendly  neutrality  in  German  affairs.  Disinterestedness  is 
rare  among  nations:  the  French  are  still  reproaching  their  best 
and  their  worst  kings,  Louis  IX  and  Louis  XV,  for  having 
made  peace  "  like  kings,  not  like  merchants."  *  Bismarck  was, 

•  In   this   same   spirit   the  United    States  liberated   Cuba   and  pocketed 
Porto-Rico  as  a  fee.     What  is  Cyprus  but  a  "  tip"? 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913          153 

of  course,  unwilling  to  yield  "  a  single  inch  of  German  soil." 
In  1866  he  secured  Napoleon's  indispensable  neutrality  by  vague 
promises :  Sadowa  enabled  him  to  deny  France  any  compensa- 
tion. In  1867  he  thwarted  Napoleon's  designs  on  Luxembourg. 
He  believed  that  France  would  not  renounce  her  claims  to  the 
left  bank  of  the  Rhine  without  a  war.  This  war  he  prepared 
with  admirable  efficiency,  and  at  the  favourable  moment  he 
sprang  a  trap  in  which  Napoleon  was  caught. 

But  not  Napoleon  alone:  it  is  customary  with  Republican 
orators  and  the  authors  of  official  text-books  to  lay  the  whole 
responsibility  on  the  Emperor.  This  is  absolutely  contrary  to 
facts.  The  Empire  in  1870  was  a  constitutional  monarchy,  not 
essentially  different  from  that  of  England.  A  Liberal  Ministry 
led  by  a  former  Republican,  a  Chamber  of  Deputies  elected  by 
universal  suffrage  and  comprising  a  numerous  opposition,  were 
swept  off  their  feet  by  the  wave  of  popular  chauvinism.  The 
newspapers  were  unanimously  and  bitterly  in  favour  of  war. 
The  Parisian  mob  thronged  the  boulevards  shouting  "  To 
Berlin !  "  Even  at  the  height  of  his  power  Napoleon  would 
have  found  it  no  easy  task  to  resist  such  an  explosion  of  public 
sentiment.  It  would  have  required  the  old  dictatorial  methods, 
the  gagging  of  Parliament,  the  muzzling  of  the  Press,  and  the 
strict  enforcement  of  order  in  the  street.  That  the  country  as  a 
whole,  more  stolid  than  Paris,  was  averse  to  war;  that,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  reactionary  clique  of  the  Empress  exerted  its 
influence  in  favour  of  it,  may  be  taken  for  granted.  But  the  fact 
remains  that  the  responsibility  for  the  whole  piece  of  criminal 
folly  on  the  French  side  rests  with  the  Government,  Parliament, 
the  journalists,  the  populace — all  the  official  or  self-appointed 
spokesmen  of  national  opinion. 

Lebceuf  had  boasted :  "  We  are  ready,  more  than  ready. 
There  is  not  a  gaiter-button  missing."  Nothing  was  ready. 
The  army  was  in  a  deplorable  state.  Favouritism  and  corrup- 
tion were  undoubtedly  rife.  The  Mexican  expedition  had 
drained  the  resources  of  the  French  arsenals.  The  dashing, 
erratic  warfare  against  Algerian  tribesmen  had  been  for  thirty 
years  a  school  of  bravery — and  carelessness.  An  officer,  asked 
if  he  was  provided  with  a  good  map  of  the  frontier,  half  drew  his 


15*     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

sword :  "  Maps !  Here  is  my  map !  "  These  lion-hearted  and 
light-headed  knights  had  to  face  the  formidable  fighting  machine 
scientifically  constructed  by  Moltke  and  Roon.  Here  again 
France  and  not  the  Government  alone  was  responsible.  The 
warnings  of  Colonel  Stoffel,  the  French  military  attache  at 
Berlin,  were  not  wholly  unheeded.  Marshal  Niel  had  attempted 
to  reorganize  the  military  system  of  France.*  But  the  demo- 
crats, guided  by  generous  pacific  principles  and  also  by  their 
hatred  and  diffidence  of  the  Empire,  opposed  his  efforts.  The 
middle  classes  did  not  want  any  conscription  law  that  would 
curtail  their  privilege  of  buying  their  sons  off.  France  had  a 
regular  army  smaller  than  that  of  the  allied  German  States  and 
no  trained  reserves. 

Even  with  these  elements  a  great  military  leader  could  have 
staved  off  a  crushing  disaster.  No  such  leader  was  found. 
MacMahon  was  an  honest  man  and  a  brave  soldier,  but  devoid 
of  genius.  Bazaine,  the  favourite  of  the  opposition,  was 
cunning  rather  than  skilful,  and  ever  thinking  of  his  own  political 
interests.  Trochu  was  an  eloquent  theorist  whom  the  Empire 
distrusted,  not  without  cause:  for  he  showed  neither  political 
steadiness  nor  resourcefulness  in  an  unheard-of  crisis.  In  order 
to  quell  the  rivalry  of  his  generals  the  Emperor,  sick,  enfeebled 
in  mind  and  body,  and  even  at  his  best  the  reverse  of  a  military 
genius,  assumed  personal  command.  Aimless  marches  and 
counter-marches  led  the  main  French  army  from  the  frontier 
to  Chalons  and  from  Chalons  to  Sedan.  These  chaotic  move- 
ments were  due  to  political  as  well  as  to  strategic  considerations. 
It  was  the  fear  of  the  Republican  opposition  which  prevented  a 
concentration  of  all  available  forces  under  Paris.  Heavy  is  the 
responsibility  of  the  men  who,  in  the  throes  of  a  great  war,  did 
not  forget  their  party  grievances  and  paralysed  the  national 
Government. 

The  Emperor  had  abdicated  all  control :  he  followed  passively 
his  demoralized  troops.  At  Sedan  three  generals  in  succession, 
MacMahon,  Ducrot,  de  Wimpfen,  tried  to  escape  from  the  iron 

•  Cf.  his  famous  words,  often  repeated  in  1913:  "You  are  afraid  of 
turning:  the  country  into  a  camp:  take  care  you  do  not  turn  it  into  a 
cemetery'" 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  155 

circle  that  the  Germans  were  closing  round  them.  When  all 
hope  was  lost  Napoleon  sought  death,  which  spurned  him.  His 
last  act  of  authority  was  to  stop  the  useless  slaughter,  and  he 
surrendered  his  sword  to  the  King  of  Prussia. 

Hardly  had  the  news  of  the  capitulation  of  Sedan  reached  the 
capital  than  the  doom  of  the  regime  was  sealed.  The  Eevolution 
of  the  4th  of  September,  1870,  breaking  out  at  the  most  tragic 
moment  in  the  nation's  destiny,  would  be  a  great  crime  if  any 
party  were  responsible  for  it.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  neither 
Gambetta  nor  the  other  Eepublican  leaders  were  at  all  anxious 
to  see  the  government  of  their  dreams  inaugurated  under  such 
inauspicious  circumstances.  It  was  the  mob  that  invaded  the 
Assembly;  the  Imperialists  had  lost  heart  and  did  not  attempt 
to  resist.  Paris  was  so  elated  at  the  downfall  of  the  regime 
that  it  seemed  to  forget  the  national  disaster  of  Sedan.  The 
boulevards  were  as  cheerful  as  if  the  Prussians  were  not  within 
a  hundred  miles  of  the  gates.  The  provinces,  overwhelmingly 
Bonapartist  a  few  months  before,  were  too  much  used  to  a 
passive  attitude  and  too  much  stunned  by  the  sudden  turn  of 
events  to  organize  any  formal  protest.  No  change  of  regime 
was  ever  so  easy  and,  in  appearance,  so  spontaneous.  As  in 
1830  and  1848,  a  compromise  was  arrived  at  between  the  two 
strategic  centres  of  the  Eevolution,  the  Palais  Bourbon  and  the 
Town  Hall.  Although  the  Bepublic  was  officially  proclaimed 
it  was  not  organized.  The  Government  was  merely  one  of 
"  National  Defence,"  with  General  Trochu  as  its  nominal  head. 

France  made  magnificent  efforts.  But  fate  was  against  her. 
Marshal  Bazaine,  whose  duplicity  and  selfishness  verged  danger- 
ously upon  treason,  surrendered  in  Metz,  the  "  virgin  citadel," 
with -the  second  regular  army,  the  country's  last  hope.  Trochu 
proved  unequal  to  the  task  of  drilling  into  an  efficient  fighting 
force  the  vast  mob  of  raw  recruits,  "  mobiles,"  and  national  guards 
congregated  in  Paris.  Persuaded  that  no  effort  would  avail,  he 
resisted  passively,  half-heartedly,  throwing  delusive  hints  about 
a  mysterious  "  plan  "  of  his,  which  never  materialized.  When 
the  supplies  were  exhausted,  the  heroic  city  had  to  succumb  in 
its  turn.  Meanwhile,  three  improvised  armies,  one  in  the  North 
under  Faidherbe,  one  on  the  Loire  under  Chanzy,  one  in  the  East 


156     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

under  Bourbaki,  ill-clad,  untrained,  lacking  guns  and  ammuni- 
tion, resisted  the  victorious  Germans  much  more  stubbornly 
than  the  veterans  of  the  Empire  had  done.  Belfort,  under 
Denfert-Eochereau,  was  still  holding  out.  But  the  country  as  a 
whole  despaired  of  retrieving  its  fortune.  An  armistice  was 
negotiated,  the  terms  of  peace  were  confirmed  by  a  National 
Assembly  elected  in  February,  and  the  final  treaty,  signed  at 
Frankfort,  gave  up  to  Germany  Alsace,  one-third  of  Lorraine, 
and  a  war  indemnity  of  5,000,000,000  francs. 

On  the  4th  of  September,  the  Parisians  had  been  decoyed  by 
the  legend  of  1792.  At  that  time,  the  Prussians  had  invaded 
Champagne;  the  regular  army  was  disorganized  by  the  desertion 
of  its  noble  officers;  a  corrupt  monarchy  was  swept  away  on  the 
10th  of  August:  six  weeks  later,  the  advance  of  the  enemy  was 
checked  at  Valmy,  and  France  was  saved.  The  same  miracle 
was  confidently  expected.  But  it  did  not  take  place.  Not  that 
Gambetta  was  inferior  to  Danton,  Chanzy  and  Faidherbe  to 
Dumouriez  and  Kellermann,  the  mobiles  and  sharp-shooters  of 
1870  to  the  volunteers  of  1792.  But  circumstances  were  different. 
The  progress  of  military  science  throughout  the  century  had 
made  the  difference  between  trained  and  improvised  troops  more 
telling.  Then,  if  the  Prussians  retreated  after  a  slight  repulse  in 
September,  1792,  it  was  chiefly  because  the  impending  partition 
of  Poland  drew  much  of  their  attention.  The  doom  of  that 
unfortunate  country  gave  France  some  breathing  time.  Finally, 
the  spirit  of  the  bourgeoisie  and  peasantry  was  no  longer  the 
same.  There  was  no  degeneration:  but  in  1792  the  French 
were  fighting  for  their  new  regime,  for  the  precious  conquests  of 
their  Revolution,  for  liberty  and  equality.  In  1870  they  refused 
to  stake  their  all  for  the  continuation  of  a  desperate  war,  the 
result  of  which  was  to  affect  their  national  entity  in  a  certain 
degree,  but  not  their  daily  lives.  France  was  ever  rich  in  heroes : 
but  there  never  was  a  whole  nation  of  Don  Quixotes. 

The  elections  sent  to  the  Assembly  a  conservative  and  monar- 
chical majority.  The  Republic  was  emphatically  disowned  at  the 
polls.  The  country  that  had  so  recently  endorsed  the  Empire 
had  not  veered  suddenly  to  the  opposite  pole,  radicalism.  It 
resented  Paris's  pretensions  of  changing  every  few  years  the  form 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  157 

of  government  without  consulting  the  provinces.  Moreover,  the 
triumph  of  Gambetta's  friends  would  have  meant  the  continuation 
of  the  war. 

Then  broke  out  the  most  terrible  insurrection  of  modern  times, 
the  Commune.  In  spite  of  an  inveterate  tradition  to  that  effect, 
neither  the  name  nor  the  origin  of  the  Commune  had  anything 
to  do  with  socialism.  The  name  was  borrowed  from  the  great 
municipal  assembly  which,  under  the  first  Revolution,  had  long 
imposed  its  law  upon  the  Convention  itself.  It  meant  "com- 
munal "  or  municipal  autonomy,  the  refusal  of  Paris  to  be 
governed  by  the  reactionary  provinces.  Its  causes  were  patriotic, 
economic,  and  local.  Paris  had  just  gone  through  a  long  siege 
without  being  able  to  save  the  country.  A  dull  and  not  unjusti- 
fiable feeling  prevailed  that  there  had  been  incompetence,  if 
not  actual  treason,  on  the  part  of  mediocre  and  disheartened 
leaders.  Paris  received  no  thanks  for  its  heroic  resistance; 
it  was  not  spared  the  triumphal  entry  of  the  German  troops. 
The  conservative  Assembly  at  Bordeaux  took  away  its  title  of 
French  capital,  and  gave  it,  not  to  Bourges  or  Tours,  which 
might  have  been  justified  for  strategic  reasons,  but  to  Ver- 
sailles, the  city  of  Louis  XIV,  the  symbol  of  the  ancient  regime. 
It  was  a  deliberate  insult.  Debts  and  rents,  long  suspended, 
were  made  immediately  exigible.  The  scanty  pay  of  the  National 
Guards,  which  alone  kept  many  of  them  from  starvation,  was 
suddenly  stopped.  It  seemed  as  though  Thiers  and  his  partisans 
wanted  to  humiliate  and  to  vex  in  every  way  the  noble  city 
which  had  long  thought  her  destiny  identical  with  that  of  France. 

The  insurrection  of  the  18th  of  March,  made  in  defence  of  the 
Eepublic,  was  no  more  unjustifiable  than  that  of  the  4th  of 
September.  The  Second  Empire,  confirmed  by  three  plebiscites, 
was  as  legitimate  a  government  as  that  of  M.  Thiers.  In  the 
minds  of  exalted  patriots,  the  capitulation  of  Sedan  and  the 
acceptance  of  a  shameful  peace  deserved  to  be  visited  with  the 
same  penalty.  The  first  elections  of  the  Commune  showed  that 
the  Parisians  were  fairly  unanimous  in  their  support  of  the. new 
regime,  which,  considering  the  circumstances,  was  then  curiously 
moderate. 

M.  Thiers  made  no  effort  to  come  to  an  understanding  with 


158     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-rn  CENTURY 

Paris.  He  at  once  withdrew  to  Versailles,  gathered  an  army 
with  the  assistance  of  the  Prussians,  and  proceeded  to  reduce  the 
insurrection  by  force.  He  refused  to  recognize  the  insurgents 
as  belligerents,  whilst  Lincoln  had  granted  that  privilege  to  the 
Southern  rebels.  Captured  Communards  could  be  summarily 
shot.  It  is  in  answer  to  this  savage  procedure  that  the  Commune 
seized  hostages,  pure  and  venerable  victims  for  whose  deaths 
Thiers's  obstinacy  and  ruthlessness  is  mainly  responsible.  The 
rule  of  the  Commune,  until  the  last  week,  was  free  from  theft  and 
violence. 

However,  when  the  insurrection  had  become  a  civil  war,  when 
it  was  known  that  the  uprisings  of  the  other  great  cities  had 
been  suppressed,  and  that  Thiers  had  the  situation  well  in  hand, 
the  Commune  lost  the  support  of  the  moderate  elements  and 
became  the  prey  of  professional  revolutionists,  some  of  them  dis- 
reputable bohemians,  others  dangerous  fanatics,  many  foreign 
refugees,  the  scum  of  a  cosmopolitan  city.  Even  then  the  policy 
of  the  Commune  was  democratic  rather  than  socialistic.  The 
act  generally  considered  most  typical  and  most  reprehensible  of 
those  two  months,  the  felling  of  the  Vendome  column  on  a  dung- 
heap,  had  been  prepared  by  the  anti-Napoleonic  campaigns  of  the 
bourgeois  Liberals. 

Finally  the  Commune  was  conquered,  in  a  week  of  horror,  the 
"bloody  week,"  the  very  name  of  which  still  causes  every 
Parisian  to  shudder.  The  Communards  at  bay  carried  out  the 
threats  of  universal  conflagration  which  have  always  haunted  the 
conquered  and  downtrodden.  The  lieutenants  of  MacMahon 
replied  by  shooting  seventeen  thousand  men  in  cold  blood,  after 
the  fight  was  won.  Forty-five  thousand  people  were  arrested, 
herded  in  the  camp  of  Satory,  cooped  up  in  old  hulks  for  weary 
months.  Eight  thousand  five  hundred  were  sentenced  by  drum- 
head tribunals,  as  illegal  as  the  Provosts'  Courts  of  1816  or  the 
Mixed  Commissions  of  1852,  shot,  imprisoned,  transported.  .  .  . 
The  Terror  of  1794  was  mild  compared  with  the  repression  of  the 
Commune.  Thiers  could  boast  that  he  had  "  bled  democracy  for 
a  generation."  *  The  apocalyptic  horror  of  the  "  bloody  week  " 

•  The  fact  that  the  buildings  burnt  by  the  Commune  were  chiefly  those 
in  which  the  financial  and  administrative  records  of  the  Empire  were  kept 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1918  159 

made  a  profound  impression  on  the  French  mind.  A  furious 
wave  of  reaction,  worse  than  after  June,  1848,  and  December, 
1851,  swept  over  the  country,  and  upset  the  mental  balance  of 
sane  and  progressive  men  like  Taine  and  Renan.  International 
socialism  was  denounced  as  the  cause  of  the  upheaval,  and 
socialism  did  not  deny  the  accusation ;  *  almost  all  the  victims 
were  proletarians,  and  the  Commune  ended  undoubtedly  as  a 
class  struggle.  This  stream  of  blood  still  lies  between  French 
capital  and  labour,  perpetuating  hatred.  It  cannot  be  denied 
that  Thiers's  ruthlessness  was  efficient  in  exorcising  from  French 
national  life  that  irresponsible  Caliban,  the  Paris  mob,  which,  ten 
times  in  a  century,  had  imposed  its  brutal  dictatorship.  Would 
to  God  this  great  boon  had  not  been  purchased  at  such  a  heavy 
price ! 


§  2.  RECUPERATION.     FOUNDATION  OF  THE  REPUBLIC.     CON- 
QUEST OF  THE  REPUBLIC  BY  THE  REPUBLICANS. 

After  ten  months  of  foreign  and  civil  war,  France  was  covered 
with  ruins.  She  set  herself  at  once  to  the  double  task  of  repair- 
ing the  havoc  wrought  by  the  "  terrible  year,"  and  of  establishing 
a  permanent  form  of  government. 

The  war  indemnity  was  paid  off  with  a  rapidity  which  aston- 
ished and  disappointed  Bismarck.  He  had  hoped  that  France 
would  be  financially  crippled  for  a  generation,  and  lo !  42,000,- 
000,000  francs  were  offered  in  July,  1872,  when  Thiers  asked  for 
3,000,000,000.  The  German  troops  which  were  to  occupy 
certain  parts  of  France  until  the  final  settlement  withdrew  on 

(Tuileries,  Cour  des  Comptes,  Prefecture  of  Police,  Ministry  of  Finances) 
gave  rise  to  the  suspicion  that  the  incendiaries  had  been  the  tools  of  finan- 
ciers and  politicians  interested  in  the  suppression  of  damning:  evidence. 
But  there  is  no  other  proof  than  the  old  maxim :  Id  fecit  qui  prodest. 

If  this  account  of  the  Commune  should  seem  biased  to  the  English 
reader,  he  may  find  its  main  points  confirmed  in  the  works  of  such  patri- 
otic and  conservative  writers  as  Paul  and  Victor  Margueritte  or  Gabriel 
Hanotaui.  The  day  is  fortunately  over  when  it  was  not  safe,  even  "for 
Victor  Hugo,  to  breathe  a  word  of  sympathy  and  pity  for  the  Communards. 

•On  January  17,  1913,  when  Vaillant,  the  Socialist  candidate  for  the 
Presidency  of  the  Republic,  received  70  votes,  the  result  was  hailed  by  his 
friends  with  cries  of  "  Vive  la  Commune !  " 


160     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

September  20,  1873.  Thiers  conducted  these  financial  and 
diplomatic  operations  with  undoubted  skill  and  success.  Yet 
Gambetta  must  have  been  moved  by  the  desire  of  winning  over 
the  veteran  statesman  to  his  own  side  when  he  proclaimed  him, 
with  an  eloquent  gesture,  "  the  liberator  of  our  territory."  Even 
M.  Hanotaux,  a  great  admirer  of  Thiers,  admits  that  France 
could  have  borrowed  money  on  much  more  favourable  terms  if 
the  President  of  the  Republic  had  exercised  a  little  more  care. 

By  a  curious  paradox  of  finance,  the  sudden  afflux  of  wealth 
into  Germany  brought  about  a  serious  crisis,  whilst  the  drain  on 
the  resources  of  France  was  not  immediately  felt.*  Railroads, 
bridges,  public  and  private  buildings  had  to  be  rehabilitated;  a 
chain  of  fortresses  had  to  be  erected  along  the  gaping  Eastern 
frontier;  military  stores  had  to  be  replenished.  Commerce  and 
industry  boomed  as  in  the  best  years  of  the  Second  Empire.  In 
1878  an  International  Exposition  was  held  in  Paris,  and  although 
it  lacked  the  somewhat  meretricious  splendour  of  1867,  it  was  a 
magnificent  evidence  of  France's  prosperity.  Meanwhile,  the 
army  had  been  reorganized  by  the  vote  of  conscription  with  a 
five-year  term  of  service  (1872).  A  new  onslaught  on  France, 
which  Bismarck  was  meditating  in  1875,  was  averted  by  the 
friendly  intervention  of  England  and  Eussia,  and  by  the  time  of 
the  Berlin  Congress  (1878),  France  had  resumed  her  rank  as  one 
of  the  Great  Powers  in  diplomacy  and  in  military  strength.  This 
rapid  recovery  of  the  country  was  not  the  work  of  any  party.  It 
proved,  for  one  thing,  that  the  Empire  had  accumulated  vast 
material  resources  without  sapping  the  moral  vitality  of  the 
people.  The  men  in  power  from  1871  to  1878  were  the  con- 
servatives. But  to  the  Republicans  belongs  the  credit  of  having 
intelligently  and  unselfishly  supported  the  Government  whenever 
the  welfare  of  the  fatherland  was  at  stake. 

If  we  turn  to  the  second  aspect  of  this  period,  constitutional 
reorganization,  we  find  on  the  contrary  naught  but  party 
squabbles,  intrigues,  compromise,  and  as  a  result  so  unsatisfactory 
that  the  development  of  France  has  been  hampered  by  it  ever 
since.  We  have  seen  that  the  monarchists  were  in  control  of 
the  National  Assembly,  and  why.  But,  elected  on  the  question 

•  Norman  Angell,   The  Great  Illusion. 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  161 

of  peace  or  war,  it  is  doubtful  whether  they  had  a  genuine 
and  permanent  majority  in  the  country.  Moreover,  they  were 
divided  among  themselves.  The  Liberal  bourgeoisie  supported 
the  claims  of  the  Count  of  Paris,  grandson  of  Louis-Philippe — 
the  representative  of  constitutional  monarchy,  the  principles  of 
1789,  and  the  tricolour  flag.  The  great  landowners,  the  old 
nobility — returned  in  unexpected  numbers,  on  account  of  their 
personal  prominence  at  a  time  when  the  political  world  was 
disorganized — championed  the  cause  of  the  Count  of  Chambord, 
grandson  of  Charles  X,  the  representative  of  monarchy  "  by 
divine  right "  and  the  white  flag  of  the  ancient  regime.  Thiers, 
supposed  to  be  an  Orleanist,  promised  to  remain  neutral  between 
the  different  parties.  But  he  was  not  radically  averse  to  a 
Republic,  now  that  he  was  at  the  helm,  provided  it  be  a  "  con- 
servative republic,"  a  republic  without  the  Eepublicans.  The 
monarchists  realized  that  his  game  was  no  longer  theirs,  and,  in 
spite  of  his  services,  they  trapped  him  into  resigning  (May  24, 
1873).  Marshal  de  MacMahon  was  elected  in  his  place;  that 
worthy  soldier  was  a  passive  tool  in  the  hands  of  reactionary 
politicians.  Messrs,  de  Broglie  and  Fourtou  called  their  com- 
pressive  policy  the  "  restoration  of  moral  order."  It  seemed  as 
though  nothing  stood  in  the  way  of  a  return  to  monarchy. 
Bonapartism  had  not  yet  recovered  from  the  crushing  blow  of 
Sedan,  nor  democracy  from  its  supposed  connection  with  the 
Commune.  A  fusion  of  the  two  royalist  parties  was  arranged. 
The  Count  of  Paris  went  to  Frohsdorf  to  recognize  the  Count  of 
Chambord  as  the  legitimate  head  of  his  family  and  the  sole 
claimant  to  the  throne.  The  future  Henry  V,  who  was  childless, 
was  to  adopt  the  Count  of  Paris  as  his  successor.  The  negotia- 
tions failed  on  a  question  of  colour.  The  legitimist  pretender 
refused  to  give  up  the  white  flag  of  his  house.  He  would  not  be 
the  "  legitimate  king  of  the  Revolution."  The  tricolour  would 
have  made  him  the  successor,  not  of  Charles  X,  but  of  Louis- 
Philippe.  The  liberal  Royalists,  and  MacMahon  himself,  knew 
too  well  the  temper  of  the  French  people  to  consider  for  a 
moment  the  restoration  of  the  old  regime,  with  its  hated  symbol, 
as  possible.  But  the  Orleanists  alone  were  not  able  to  enthrone 
their  candidate,  who,  moreover,  had  just  renounced  his  immediate 


162     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

claims,  against  a  coalition  of  Legitimists,  Bonapartists,  and  Re- 
publicans. The  situation  had  come  to  a  deadlock.  The  only 
thing  to  do  was  to  prolong  the  power  of  MacMahon  for  seven 
years,  hoping  that  within  that  term  Providence  would  remove 
the  obstacles.  As  the  country  could  not  remain  without  an 
organization,  as  the  Bonapartists  were  gathering  strength,  a  sort 
of  neutral  or  "omnibus"  Constitution  was  voted,  suitable  for 
any  eventuality.  It  was  of  the  orthodox  parliamentary  type, 
with  a  responsible  Cabinet,  a  Senate,  and  a  Chamber  of  Deputies, 
the  latter  elected  by  direct  universal  suffrage.  It  was  agreed,  by 
a  plurality  of  a  single  vote,  that  the  head  of  the  State  should  be 
called  President  of  the  Eepublic.*  But  he  was  in  every  respect  a 
constitutional  monarch,  non-partisan,  dignified  and  irresponsible. 


OUTLINES  OF  THE  CONSTITUTION  OF  1875. — The  President  of  the  Repub- 
lic is  elected  for  seven  years  by  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament  meeting 
together  (at  Versailles)  in  "  Congress."  He  is  irresponsible.  He  can  be 
re-elected  (Grevy  was  in  1886).  He  appoints  Ministers  and  can  dissolve 
the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  but  only  with  the  concurrence  of  the  Senate 
(MacMahon  did  in  1877). 

The  Deputies  are  elected  for  four  years  by  manhood  (wrongly  called 
universal)  suffrage,  each  in  a  separate  constituency  (circonscription:  this 
is  the  scrutin  uninominal  or  scrutin  d'arrondissement).  From  1885  to 
1889  lists  or  tickets,  instead  of  individual  candidates,  were  balloted  for  in 
the  larger  district  known  as  departement  (scrutin  de  liste).  A  majority 
of  the  registered  voters  is  required  to  elect  on  the  first  ballot ;  a  mere  plu- 
rality is  sufficient  on  the  second  ballot  (scrutin  de  ballot  ape). 

The  Senate  is  composed  of  three  hundred  members,  elected  for  nine 
years,  and  renewable  by  thirds  every  three  years.  They  are  elected  in 
each  department  by  a  special  college  composed  of  the  deputies  and  gen- 
eral councillors  of  the  department,  the  district  councillors  (conselllers 
d'arrondissement)  and  delegates  from  the  municipal  councils.  Both 
Houses  have  exactly  the  same  rights  and  privileges.  As  a  matter  of  Par- 
liamentary practice  the  Budget  is  submitted  first  to  the  Chamber,  which 
also  has  a  practical  monopoly  of  overthrowing  Ministries  (except  the 
Bourgeois  Cabinet  in  1896  and  the  Briand  Cabinet  in  1913,  defeated  in  the 
Senate). 

The  Cabinet,  or  Ministry,  or  Council  of  Ministers  is  composed  of  twelve 
Ministers  (at  present)  and  a  varying  number  of  Under-Secretaries  of 
State  (from  two  to  five).  They  are  appointed  by  the  President,  but  re- 
sponsible chiefly  to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies.  Any  Member  of  Parliament 
can  "  interpellate  "  (question)  any  Minister,  upon  which  a  vote  is  taken, 
and  a  Cabinet  defeated  in  an  important  division  is  immediately  expected 
to  resign.  A  change  of  Ministries  is  not  followed  as  in  England  by  a  Oen- 


•Wallon  amendment.     The  final  draft  of  the  Constitution  was  passed  by 
£08  votes  to  J  74 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  163 

eral  Election,  and  party  ties  are  looser,  so  there  is  no  check  on  the  de- 
structive propensities  of  the  individual  members.  It  may  be  said  that  the 
Ministry  is  merely  a  joint  committee  of  the  two  Houses,  revokable  at  will. 
In  other  words,  the  Executive  is  absolutely  subordinated  to  the  Legis- 
lative. 

The  Prime  Minister  assumes  control  of  the  most  important  department 
at  the  time.  This  is  generally,  but  not  invariably,  the  Department  of  the 
Interior.  Except  the  Ministers  of  War  and  Naval  Secretaries,  who  have 
frequently  been  generals  and  admirals,  practically  every  Minister  of  the 
Third  Republic  was  a  Member  of  Parliament. 


This  Constitution  of  1875,  with  unimportant  changes,  endures 
to  the  present  day,  and  there  is  no  important  movement  afoot  for 
its  revision.*  It  has  preserved  France  from  adventures,  and  must 
therefore  be  considered  a  successful  compromise.  Its  great  fault, 
the  impotence  of  the  nominal  head  of  the  State,  is  not  inherent 
in  its  principle,  but  is  the  result  of  a  crisis,  which  we  are  now 
going  to  relate. 

The  general  elections  gave  a  popular  majority  to  the  Repub- 
licans, under  the  joint  leadership  of  two  widely  different  men, 
Thiers  and  Gambetta.  The  conservatives,  who  still  controlled 
the  Presidency,  and,  by  a  narrow  margin,  the  Senate,  did  not 
want  to  lose  their  hold  of  France  without  a  fight.  They  pre- 
vailed upon  Marshal  MacMahon  to  dismiss  his  Republican 
Premier,  Jules  Simon  (May  16,  1877)  and  to  dissolve  the 
Chamber  of  Deputies. 

Official  pressure  was  everywhere  exerted  in  favour  of  the 
Royalist-Catholic  coalition.  De  Broglie  tried  once  more  to 
"boss"  (faire  marcher)  the  electorate.  It  was  the  alliance 
between  the  conservatives  and  the  Church,  more  than  anything 
else,  which  ruined  their  cause.  Anti-clericalism  became  the 
rallying  cry  of  the  Radical  party.  Gambetta  led  an  admirable 
campaign,  and  Thiers,  on  his  deathbed,  encouraged  the  Repub- 
licans". The  same  majority,  with  hardly  any  reduction,  was 
returned  to  Parliament.  A  coup  d'etat  of  the  Royalists  at 
bay  was  feared.  But  MacMahon  was  a  loyal  soldier:  he  had 
strained  to  the  utmost,  he  refused  to  violate,  the  Constitution 
committed  to  his  keeping.  He  accepted  his  defeat  and  formed 

•  The  electoral  reform  known  as  "  proportional  representation  "  in  not 
a  constitutional  change. 


164.     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXrn  CENTURY 

a  Bepublican  Ministry.  He  took  the  first  opportunity  to  resign 
as  soon  as  the  war  cloud  in  the  East  was  dispelled  and  the  Ex- 
position was  over*  (1879).  A  few  weeks  before,  the  senatorial 
elections  had  taken  from  the  Eoyalists  the  control  of  the  Upper 
House.  In  1881  the  Communards  were  amnestied.  Thus  the 
Royalists  had  been  compelled  to  organize  the  Republic,  and  the 
Republicans  had  conquered  it.  The  normal  life  of  the  new 
regime  could  now  begin. 


§  3.  THE  OPPORTUNIST  REPUBLIC,  1879-99. 

I  3.  The  Opportunist  Republic,  1879-99. — Result  of  the  1 6th  of  May : 
annihilation  of  the  Presidency,  paralysis  of  the  Executive — The 
Opportunists — The  group  system — Shifting  combinations  and  coali- 
tion Ministries — Crises:  Boulanger — Colonial  expansion — The  Rus- 
sian alliance. 

The  Freycinet  plan  of  public  works — Popular  education — Anti- 
clericalism. 

§  4.  The  Dreyfus  Case  and  the  Radical  Block,  1899  seq. — The  Drey- 
fus case — Meaning  of  the  "  affair  " — Intensity  of  the  crisis — Wal- 
deck-Rousseau,  Galliffet,  Millerand :  the  Ministry  of  Republican 
Defence — Anti-clerical  reprisals — Weakness  of  constructive  policy 
— Rupture  of  Radicals  and  Socialists. 

But  the  crisis  of  the  16th  of  May  had  one  disastrous  effect. 
MacMahon  had  used  to  the  utmost  his  constitutional  prerogative 
against  the  representatives  of  popular  opinion:  it  became  a  car- 
dinal principle  with  the  Republicans  that  the  President  should 
be  as  neutral,  as  insignificant,  as  "  innocuous "  as  possible. 
Thus  they  chose  to  succeed  the  Marshal  a  veteran  of  '48, 
Jules  Gre'vy,  a  skilful  lawyer,  a  stanch  Republican,  but  not  a 
forceful  personality.  Until  1913  it  may  be  said  that  Presi- 
dents were  chosen  for  negative  reasons — because  they  were 
"safe"  men:  youth,  talent,  energy,  popularity,  were  insuper- 
able disqualifications.!  Thus  the  French  Constitution  was 


•  He  died  In  1893,  universally  respected. 

tTo  Grevy  succeeded  in  1887  Sadl  Carnot.  the  grandson  of  the  Organizer 
of  Victory,  a  man  of  faultless  dignity  in  public  and  private  life,  but  with- 
out any  of  the  qualities  of  a  leader.  After  Carnot's  assassination  in  1894 
an  energetic  President  was  selected,  Casimir  Pe>ier:  but  as  soon  as  the 
terror  of  anarchy  blew  over,  Parliament  and  his  very  Cabinet  tried  to 
snub  and  paralyse  the  chief  executive.  A  great  capitalist,  unpopular  with 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  165 

thrown  entirely  out  of  gear.  For  thirty-four  years  there  has 
been  no  independent  Executive.  The  President  was  not  even 
a  figure-head.  The  Ministry  was  a  mere  joint  committee  of 
both  Houses  which  could  be  recalled  on  the  most  futile  pretext. 
Parties  were  vague  and  powerless  entities:  the  situation  was 
controlled  by  small  cliques,  the  clientele  of  some  influential 
leader.  Hence  the  amorphous,  acephalic  character  of  politics 
under  the  Republic,  compared  with  English  and  American  con- 
ditions. Hence  the  rise  of  a  class  of  professional  politicians, 
honest  as  a  rule,  but  devoted  to  their  own  interests  and  to  those 
of  their  narrow  constituencies,  whilst  the  vital  interests  of  the 
country  as  a  whole  had  no  organized  and  permanent  representa- 
tion. The  paralysis  of  the  Executive  makes  the  Government  a 
caricature  rather  than  an  adaptation  of  English  parliamentarism. 
The  period  from  the  resignation  of  MacMahon  to  the  death  of 
Felix  Faure  may  be  called  the  "  Opportunist "  Eepublic.  There 
was  a  split  in  the  victorious  Republican  party.  The  Radicals 
kept  true  to  the  old  programme  of  the  opposition  under  the 
Empire ;  of  these  M.  Clemenceau  was  the  most  brilliant  represen- 
tative. The  Opportunists,  led  by  Gambetta  himself,  wished  to 
settle  each  problem  in  its  turn  "  as  opportunity  offered."  But 
the  presence  of  a  monarchical  opposition,  and  the  memory  of 
long  campaigns  waged  in  common,  prevented  the  Republicans 
from  dividing  into  real  homogeneous  parties  of  the  Anglo- 
American  type.  Most  of  the  administrations  formed  during 
these  years  were  "  concentration "  or  coalition  Cabinets,  in 
which  all  fractions  of  the  Republicans  were  represented, 
although  the  more  conservative,  the  Opportunists,  were 
generally  the  predominant  element.  These  parliamentary 
combinations  were  exceedingly  unstable,  and  Ministries  which 
lasted  two  years,  like  those  of  Jules  Ferry  (1883-5)  and  Jules 
Meline  (1896-8)  were  regarded  as  instances  of  wonderful 
longevity.  These  constant  changes  did  not  affect  the  country 
quite  so  disastrously  as  might  have  been  feared.  A  permanent 

the  masses,  P6rier  could  not  appeal  to  public  opinion,  and  was  compelled 
to  resign  in  a  few  months.  P61ix  Faure  was  a  man  of  humble  origin,  un- 
dfsting-uished  in  every  respect,  whose  fondness  for  monarchical  etiquette 
reminded  the  French  of  the  famous  "  Bourgeois  Qentilhomme."  Of  the 
living,  nil  nisi  bonum. 


166     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

bureaucracy,  not  submitted,  as  in  America,  to  the  spoils  system, 
carried  on  the  business  of  government  with  exasperating  slow- 
ness and  want  of  foresight,  but  with  tolerable  thoroughness  and 
undoubted  honesty.  And  in  the  ministerial  kaleidoscope  each 
new  combination  was  made  up  of  old  elements.  As  M.  Cle- 
menceau  was  reproved  for  overthrowing  so  many  Cabinets  he 
answered,  "  I  never  combated  but  one :  they  are  all  the  same." 
In  spite  of  appearances  due  to  a  faulty  Constitution,  France  in 
the  eighties  and  nineties  of  the  last  century  was  not  a  seething 
mass  of  political  experiments,  but  a  democracy  of  peasants  and 
small  shopkeepers,  cautious  and  averse  to  change. 

But  these  divisions  of  the  Republicans,  and  the  disrepute  into 
which  their  squabbles  had  caused  them  to  fall,  brought  about 
repeated  crises.  In  1885  the  Monarchists  reconquered  many 
seats  in  Parliament.  In  1886  the  Bonapartist  and  Orleanist 
pretenders  acted  with  an  indiscretion  which  led  to  their  expul- 
sion. In  1888-89  General  Boulanger,  handsome,  popular,  un- 
scrupulous, started  a  great  movement  in  favour  of  the  revision  of 
the  Constitution.  His  plan  was  to  substitute  a  Republic  of  the 
American  type,  with  a  strong  Executive  elected  directly  by 
the  people,  for  the  helpless  parliamentary  regime  established 
by  the  compromise  of  1875.  This  attracted  to  his  party  many 
democrats  and  some  of  the  noisiest  Socialists  (Rochefort),  whilst 
patriots  athirst  for  "  revenge  "  saw  in  him  the  future  deliverer 
of  Alsace-Lorraine.  The  conservatives  worked  in  conjunction 
with  him  in  so  far  as  his  efforts  tended  to  the  overthrow  of 
their  common  enemies.  This  adventure,  a  mixture  of  legitimate 
aspirations  and  shady  intrigues,  of  sane  principles  and  raw 
demagogy,  collapsed  before  the  united  and  spirited  defence  of 
the  parliamentary  Republicans.  The  conservatives  had  their 
revenge  in  the  Panama  scandals,  which  broke  out  in  1890-92, 
and  in  which  as  many  as  one  hundred  and  four  politicians  were 
said  to  be  involved.  But  in  spite  of  divisions,  attacks,  and 
scandals  the  Republic  was  unshakeable.  The  centennial  cele- 
bration of  the  great  Revolution  was  a  triumph,  and  in  1893  the 
Pope  himself,  Leo  XIII,  advised  French  Catholics  to  "rally" 
to  the  existing  Government. 

Beyond  the  frontiers  this  period  was  marked  by  two  develop- 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  167 

ments,  colonial  expansion  and  the  Russian  alliance.  The  move- 
ment of  colonial  expansion  meant  that  France,  whilst  giving 
up  the  immediate  hope  of  reconquering  the  lost  provinces,  had 
become  again  a  self-confident,  aggressive  nation.  In  twenty 
years  an  immense  empire  was  added  to  the  scanty  oversea 
dominions  of  the  Republic.  Tunis  was  conquered  in  1881, 
Tonquin  in  1885,  Madagascar  in  1885  and  1895,  the  Ivory 
Coast  and  Dahomey  in  1887,  and  in  1893  Brazza  won  for  his 
adopted  country  a  vast  share  of  the  Congo  basin.  The  old 
colony  of  Senegal  was  extended  as  far  as  the  Niger.  The  mys- 
terious city  of  Timbuctoo  passed  under  the  tricolour,  and  the 
Sahara  became  mainly  "  a  French  desert."  With  Lake  Tchad 
as  a  point  of  junction,  all  the  Western  African  possessions  of 
France  formed  a  solid  whole.  The  only  set-back  in  this  trium- 
phant progress  was  the  unfortunate  withdrawal  from  the  Anglo- 
French  condominium  in  Egypt  (1882).  The  Marchand  mission 
was  an  ill-considered  attempt  to  reopen  the  Egyptian  question, 
and  led  to  the  Fashoda  crisis  (1898).  Jules  Ferry  was 
prominently  identified  with  the  colonial  expansion  of  France. 
Unpopularity  was  the  first  reward  of  his  efforts,  and  few  states- 
men were  ever  more  bitterly  assailed  than  the  "  Tonkinese." 
Next  to  Jules  Ferry,  Bismarck  is  entitled  to  the  gratitude  of  the 
French.  The  Iron  Chancellor  encouraged  his  Western  neigh- 
bours in  their  exotic  ambitions,  probably  in  the  Machiavellian 
hope  of  embroiling  them  in  difficulties  with  Italy  and  England. 
The  conquest  in  two  decades  of  an  oversea  domain  second  to 
that  of  England  alone  is  an  achievement  of  national  energy  and 
perseverance  which  even  anti-colonists  cannot  fail  to  admire. 

The  alliance  with  Russia  was  a  necessity.  France  needed  an 
ally  against  Germany,  and  that  ally  could  not  be  England,  still 
faithful  to  her  policy  of  splendid  isolation,  and  in  keen  rivalry 
with  France  in  the  colonial  field.  Russia  had  been  duped  by 
Germany  at  the  Congress  of  Berlin,  which  postponed  by  a 
third  of  a  century  the  rightful  settlement  of  the  Balkan  question. 
The  triple  alliance  of  Germany,  Austria-Hungary,  and  Italy 
made  an  association  of  Russia  and  France  indispensable  to  the 
preservation  of  equilibrium  in  Europe.  There  is  something 
shocking  at  first  in  this  "  marriage  of  convenience  "  between  the 


168 

land  of  the  Revolution  and  a  semi-Asiatic,  autocratic  Empire. 
The  Tsar  orders  his  soldiers  to  shoot  down  the  strikers  who  sing 
the  "  Marseillaise,"  the  song  of  militant  democracy,  while  he 
listens  bareheaded  to  the  strains  of  the  same  "  Marseillaise,"  the 
national  anthem  of  his  "  friends  and  allies."  After  a  few  years 
of  half-ludicrous,  half-touching  enthusiasm  the  Russian  alliance 
is  no  longer  popular  with  the  masses ;  but  it  has  for  a  while  dis- 
pelled the  nightmare  of  renewed  aggression,  and  no  one  seriously 
proposes  to  do  away  with  it. 

In  the  economic  field  a  great  effort  was  made  to  complete  the 
network  of  roads,  railways,  and  canals.  The  Freycinet  scheme, 
all  too  inclusive,  frittered  away  countless  millions  on  local  public 
works,  according  to  what  Americans  call  the  "  pork-barrel 
system,"  whilst  the  main  arteries  of  commerce  were  not  im- 
proved so  rapidly  as  in  neighbouring  countries.*  The  miti- 
gated form  of  free- trade  imposed  by  the  Emperor  in  1860  was 
finally  given  up  in  1892.  M.  Meline,  the  chief  representative 
of  the  agricultural  interests,  secured  the  vote  of  a  protective 
tariff,  which  is  still  in  force,  with  little  prospect  of  immediate 
relief. 

The  development  of  popular  education  is  by  far  the  most 
creditable  achievement  of  the  Third  Republic.  From  1880  to 
1882  Jules  Ferry  had  a  series  of  laws  enacted  which  made 
elementary  education  gratuitous,  compulsory,  and  non-sectarian. 
In  twenty  years  illiteracy  was  almost  wiped  out;  for  a  country 
predominantly  rural,  France  compares  favourably  with  any 
European  nation.  These  laws  were  by  no  means  anti-religious. 
Moral  teaching  was  to  be  based  on  the  existence  of  God,  the 
immortality  of  the  soul,  and  the  sacredness  of  duty.  A  day  was 
set  apart  in  which  children  could  receive  religious  instruction 
from  their  respective  priests  and  ministers.  But  the  Republican 
party  had  not  forgotten  that  the  clergy  had  been  their  worst 
enemy  from  1849  to  1877.  Jules  Ferry  wanted  to  debar 

*  I .••  Havre,  for  instance,  is  still  unable  to  admit  the  largest  steamers  in 
the  Atlantic  trade,  which  dock  at  Southampton ;  and  the  Paris  Ship  Canal, 
planned  by  the  most  competent  engineers — Belgrand,  Bouquet  de  la  Qrye 
— was  submitted  to  Parliament  in  1886,  endorsed  by  a  sort  of  referendum 
in  1892,  and  is  not  yet  authorized  in  1913. 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  169 

unauthorized  Orders  like  the  Jesuits  from  teaching.  The  Sen- 
ate refused  him  its  sanction.  Then  by  a  series  of  decrees  which 
were  enforced  with  some  ruthlessness  the  Minister  dissolved 
and  expelled  these  illegal  corporations.  Besides,  the  Catholic 
Church  had  not  yet  given  up  her  claims  to  absolute  control  over 
education.  The  Ferry  laws  were  violently  denounced,  the 
neutral  schools  taxed  with  "  godlessness,"  lay  teachers  ostra- 
cized, and  in  remote  districts  dangerously  persecuted.  No 
wonder  that  the  body  of  State  educators  has  gradually  become 
hostile  to  the  Roman  priesthood.  However,  it  was  not  without 
reluctance  that  the  Opportunists  were  driven  to  anti-clerical 
measures.  As  soon  as  the  conflict  abated  they  were  willing  to 
call  a  truce.  When  Leo  XIII  advised  French  Catholics  to  be 
loyal  citizens  of  the  Republic,  Spuller  responded  by  preaching 
"  the  New  Spirit "  of  tolerance  and  reconciliation. 

§  4.  THE  DREYFUS  CASE  AND  THE  RADICAL  BLOCK  FROM  1899  seq. 

These  dreams  of  national  reconciliation  were  shattered  by  the 
outbreak  of  the  Dreyfus  case.  In  1894  a  captain  attached  to 
the  general  staff,  Alfred  Dreyfus,  was  arrested  on  a  charge  of 
high  treason,  tried  in  secret,  and  sentenced  to  life  imprisonment 
in  a  distant  and  unhealthy  possession — Devil's  Island,  off  the 
coast  of  French  Guiana.  The  trial  and  the  condemnation 
caused  little  excitement  at  the  time.  Some  indignation  was 
expressed  because  this  Semite  with  a  German  name,  a  member 
of  the  bourgeois  class,  escaped  with  his  life,  whilst  the  death 
penalty  was  so  liberally  applied  to  the  sons  of  the  people  for 
minor  breaches  of  military  discipline.  The  first  efforts  of  the 
Dreyfus  family,  in  1896,  met  with  nothing  but  indifference.  In 
1897,  however,  it  leaked  out  that  Dreyfus  had  been  condemned 
on  the  strength  of  documents  not  communicated  to  himself  or 
to  his  coiinsel,  and  the  use  of  which  was  manifestly  illegal. 
Chance  put  Lieutenant-Colonel  Picquart  on  the  track  of  an 
officer  of  doubtful  reputation — Major  Esterhazy — whose  hand- 
writing bore  a  striking  resemblance  to  that  of  a  memorandum 
supposed  to  have  been  written  by  Dreyfus,  and  which  had  been 
the  main  evidence  against  him.  So  far  the  case  was  of  purely 
personal  and  technical  interest :  errors  and  illegalities  occur 


170     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-m  CENTURY 

in  all  countries,  and  are  all  too  often  difficult  to  redress.  But  the 
men  who  were  responsible  for  the  initial  mistake  or  injustice 
managed  to  identify  their  cause  with  that  of  the  army  as  a  whole. 
Then  began  an  extraordinary  crisis  which  held  the  world  breath- 
less and  shook  French  society  to  its  very  foundations.  The 
personality  of  Dreyfus  was  lost  sight  of.  The  Jewish  captain 
became  a  mere  strategic  point  round  which  raged  the  eternal 
battle  between  conservation  and  revolution. 

The  conservatives  honestly  believed  that  Dreyfus,  condemned 
by  a  jury  of  French  officers,  was  guilty  of  the  most  dastardly 
crime;  the  campaign  in  his  favour  was  engineered  and  financed 
by  an  international  committee  or  "  syndicate,"  grouping  all  the 
agencies  interested  in  the  downfall  of  France :  Jews,  Freemasons 
and  Protestants,  England  and  the  Triple  Alliance,  Socialists  and 
anarchists,  the  enemies  of  the  faith,  the  enemies  of  the  flag,  the 
enemies  of  society.  As  a  matter  of  fact  this  horrific  syndicate 
was  the  merest  nightmare.  The  first  Dreyfusists  were  patriots 
and  bourgeois — Senator  Scheurer-Kestner,  an  old  Alsatian,  and 
Lieutenant-Colonel  Picquart,  a  devoted  soldier.  Sympathy  for 
an  innocent  victim,  respect  for  law  and  justice,  were  the  only 
feelings  which  urged  them. 

But  the  hoax  of  a  "  Syndicate  of  Treason "  succeeded  and 
the  tremendous  blunder  was  made.  All  the  forces  of  conserva- 
tion— the  nobility,  the  wealthy  classes,  the  monarchists,  the 
army,  the  Church — were  banded  together  in  their  defence  of 
society;  and  the  belief  in  Dreyfus's  guilt  became  somehow 
bound  up  in  their  minds  with  law,  property,  order,  patriotism, 
and  religion.  Independent  men  refused  to  accept  the  new 
dogma  and  the  new  inquisition  which  made  it  a  punishable 
offence  to  probe  the  mysteries  of  the  "  affair."  Protestants, 
scientists,  liberals  of  all  schools  flocked  to  the  banner  of  free 
investigation.  The  Revolutionists,  reluctant  at  first  to  take 
sides  in  that  "  squabble  among  bourgeois,"  soon  saw  their 
chance.  It  was  the  conservatives  themselves,  the  pillars  of 
society,  who  identified  conservation  with  secret  methods  of 
violence  and  fraud.  Thus  in  a  country  in  which  for  over  a 
century  the  old  and  the  new  had  fought  almost  uninterruptedly; 
the  conflict  assumed  a  political,  a  social,  a  spiritual  signifi- 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  171 

cance.  It  was  the  battle  of  absolutism  against  the  Revolution, 
of  dogmatism  against  criticism,  of  the  Church  against  the 
scientific  spirit,  of  authority  against  liberty.  France  was  torn 
as  she  had  not  been  for  a  whole  generation.  Public  meetings 
were  held  for  and  against  the  retrial  of  Dreyfus,  and  not  seldom 
ended  in  pugilistic  encounters;  innumerable  publications  ap- 
peared ;  league  was  set  up  against  league.  It  was  a  magnificent 
storm,  a  combat  in  which  the  protagonists  were  not  afraid  of 
staking  their  all — position,  friendship,  and  life  itself — and  in 
which  the  very  masses  were  ennobled  by  unselfish  passion. 

Esterhazy,  formally  accused  of  the  crime  for  which  Dreyfus 
had  suffered,  was  tried  by  a  military  court  and  acquitted.  The 
last  chance  of  securing  legal  redress  had  thus  disappeared  when 
Zola  stirred  the  country  with  his  letter,  "  I  accuse ! " — the 
Luther-like  protest  of  unconquerable  conscience  (January  13, 
1898).  The  persecutors  of  Dreyfus,  still  in  power,  were  growing 
uneasy.  One  of  the  most  sincere  among  them,  M.  Cavaignac, 
Minister  of  War,  felt  the  need  of  justifying  his  own  belief  and 
published  damning  documents.  On  August  30,  1898,  Colonel 
Henry  was  compelled  to  confess  that  the  chief  of  these  had  been 
forged  by  himself.  On  the  following  morning  he  was  found  dead 
in  his  cell. 

The  revision  of  the  Dreyfus  case  was  now  inevitable.  The 
Court  of  Cassation,  the  supreme  court  of  appeal  in  the  French 
legal  system,  quashed  the  judgment  of  1894  and  sent  Dreyfus 
before  another  military  tribunal,  which  met  at  Rennes  on  August 
7,  1899.  This  second  "  Council  of  "War,"  under  pressure  of 
conservative  prejudices,  came  to  an  unconvincing,  ill-balanced 
verdict :  Dreyfus  was  found  guilty,  but  with  "  extenuating  cir- 
cumstances," and  by  only  five  votes  to  two.  So  far  as  Dreyfus 
was  concerned,  this  second  injustice  was  immediately  remedied 
by  a  free  pardon,  granted  on  September  21,  1899.  An  amnesty 
covering  all  the  offences  connected  with  the  Dreyfus  case  was 
voted  in  order  to  restore  internal  peace. 

But  the  national  stain  remained.  In  1904  the  revision  of  j;he 
1899  trial  was  ordered.  The  Supreme  Court  annulled  the 
second  judgment  absolutely,  i.e.,  without  sending  the  captain 
before  a  third  "  Council  of  War."  In  so  doing  it  undoubtedly 


172     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

stretched  the  letter  of  the  law,  to  the  great  indignation  of 
the  anti-Dreyfusists.  Dreyfus  was  thus  fully  rehabilitated. 
Clemenceau,  one  of  his  most  ardent  champions,  was  then  in 
power,  and  made  the  reparation  as  solemn  as  the  injustice  had 
been  glaring.  Dreyfus  was  promoted  to  the  rank  of  major,  and 
was  decorated  with  the  Cross  of  the  Legion  of  Honour  in  the 
very  place  where  he  had  been  degraded  twelve  years  before. 
The  remains  of  Zola  were  transferred  to  the  Pantheon.  Colonel 
Picquart,  whom  the  intrigues  of  his  enemies  had  driven  from  the 
army,  was  reinstated  with  the  rank  of  brigadier-general,  and  soon 
became  Minister  of  War. 

Meanwhile  the  "  affair "  had  radically  affected  French 
politics.  For  a  time  the  anti-Dreyfusist  coalition,  or  Nationalist 
party,  looked  formidable.  It  controlled  the  army,  and  a  mili- 
tary coup  d'etat  establishing  a  theocratic-plutocratic  dictatorship 
was  hourly  feared.  The  President  of  the  Republic,  Felix  Faure, 
was  known  to  be  in  sympathy  with  the  reactionary  element. 
But  he  died  suddenly  (1899),  and  the  Nationalists  made  the 
tactical  mistake  of  assailing  with  the  utmost  violence  the  most 
likely  candidate  for  his  succession — M.  Emile  Loubet.  M. 
Loubet  was  a  cautious,  level-headed  man,  who,  as  President  of 
the  Senate,  had  not  committed  himself  to  either  party.  The 
attacks  of  the  conservatives  alone  turned  his  election  into  a 
triumph  of  the  Dreyf  usists.  With  the  great  statesman,  Waldeck- 
Rousseau,  the  latter  assumed  power.  All  columns  of  "  the  army 
of  Justice "  were  represented  in  the  new  Ministry :  socialism 
by  Millerand,  the  old  military  aristocracy  by  General  de 
Galliffet.  It  seemed  as  though  the  most  intelligent  and  upright 
portion  of  the  upper  classes  would  unite  with  the  proletarians 
in  an  orderly  work  of  democratic  and  social  progress.  To  the 
Dreyfusist  coalition  of  Socialists,  Radicals,  and  Moderate  Repub- 
licans the  term  "  block,"  coined  by  Clemenceau  several  years 
before  in  a  different  connection,  was  ultimately  applied.  This 
"  block,"  with  many  gradual  changes,  is  still  in  power  at 
present.* 

The   defensive   policy   of   the   Block   was  obviously   mapped 

*  Cf.  the  recent  agitation  about  Lieutenant-Colonel  du  Paty  de  Clam,  a 
belated  episode  of  the  "affair,"  January,  1913. 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  173 

out.  It  was  necessary  to  curb  the  political  influence  of  the 
Church  and  to  check  the  growth  of  anti-Republican  pretorianism 
in  the  army.  The  Church  was  the  first  to  suffer.  We  shall  see 
in  a  later  chapter  how  most  religious  Orders  were  suppressed  in 
1903;  how  the  latent  conflict  with  Rome  came  to  a  head  in 
1904,  when  the  French  Ambassador  to  the  Vatican  was  recalled, 
how  Church  and  State  were  finally  separated  in  1905.  The 
difficult  task  of  "  republicanizing "  the  army  and  navy  was 
entrusted  to  General  Andre  and  M.  Camille  Pelletan.  The 
former  felt  justified  in  making  use  of  secret  notes  and  denuncia- 
tions sent  in  by  Freemasons,  just  as  many  of  his  predecessors 
had  been  influenced  by  notes  and  denunciations  of  clerical 
origin.  But  France  did  not  want  to  substitute  a  camarilla  of 
bigoted  freethinkers  for  the  occult  power  of  the  priests,  and 
the  ministry  of  General  Andre  ended  in  a  series  of  unsavoury 
scandals. 

Like  most  coalitions,  the  Block  was  weak  on  the  positive  side. 
Of  all  the  great  reforms  long  promised  by  the  Radical  party, 
hardly  any  was  carried  out  in  a  generous  and  statesmanlike 
manner.  Only  one  system  of  railroads,  the  "Western  line,  was 
taken  over  by  the  State,  and  it  has  been  woefully  mismanaged. 
The  old  age  pension  scheme,  voted  after  interminable  delays, 
was  found  more  cumbrous,  more  fraught  with  difficulties  than 
the  system  adopted  in  England.  The  income  tax  is  still  in  the 
air.  Even  the  most  obvious  result  of  the  Dreyfus  case,  the 
suppression  or  at  least  the  radical  reform  of  special  military 
courts  in  time  of  peace,  has  not  yet  been  attained. 

The  Radicals  and  the  Socialists,  after  a  few  years  of  half- 
hearted collaboration  and  constant  bickerings,  have  agreed  to 
separate.  The  Radicals,  numerically  the  most  important 
element  in  the  Block,  are  now  a  party  without  a  programme, 
that  is  to  say,  a  party  of  mere  politicians.  The  last  few  Cabinets 
are  still  nominally  "  advanced,"  and  they  relapse  once  in  a  while 
into  their  traditional  attitude  of  hostility  towards  the  Church, 
militarism,  and  plutocracy.  But  these,  as  a  rule,  are  empty 
demonstrations.  The  bourgeois  Republicans  of  all  denominations 
aspire  to  the  formation  of  a  party  of  social  conservation,  whose 
sole  enemies  would  be  the  Socialists,  trade  unionists,  and  anti- 


174     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

militarists.  The  sooner  this  evolution  is  completed,  the  sooner 
definite  lines  are  drawn,  the  better  for  French  political  life, 
which  suffers  from  the  prevailing  confusion  of  all  party  names, 
principles,  and  policies. 


§  5.  SOCIETY. 

6.  Society.  Continuation  of  the  July  monarchy — The  aristocracy: 
an  impotent  survival — Democracy  not  yet  in  control — Rule  of 
the  bourgeoisie — Extent  and  subdivisions  of  that  class — Social  prej- 
udice against  producers Its  dangers  and  advantages. 

6.  Culture. — Continuation  of  realism — Influence  of  the  Terrible 
Year:  pessimism  (Taine)  ;  irony  (Renan) — Decadence? — Revival  of 
mysticism — Cultural  aspects  of  the  Dreyfus  crisis — Empirical  ideal- 
ism. 

Socially  as  well  as  politically,  the  Third  Republic  is  a  con- 
tinuation of  the  July  monarchy.  There  was  in  the  Second 
Empire,  with  its  recklessness  and  display,  with  its  velleities  of 
humanitarian  democrac}>,  an  element  of  adventure  and  romance 
which  disappeared  in  the  purely  bourgeois  and  parliamentary 
regime  inaugurated  in  1875. 

The  old  aristocracy  has  lost  much  of  its  prestige  and  all  its 
power.  In  the  absence  of  a  Court  it  has  no  natural  centre.  It 
is  overshadowed  in  wealth,  and  not  seldom  in  culture,  by  the 
upper  bourgeoisie,  and  by  the  cosmopolitan  world  of  business 
and  pleasure.  It  is  flooded  with  spurious  nobles,  now  that  the 
nobility  no  longer  forms  an  organized  body,  capable  of  defending 
its  privileges;  the  growth  in  the  number  of  titles  under  the 
Eepublic  has  been  stupendous.*  The  genuine  aristocrats 

•  Now  that  there  Is  no  sovereign  to  confer  titles  of  nobility,  the  follow- 
ing expedients  are  resorted  to:  (1)  There  is  a  tendency  to  consider  every 
name  that  begins  with  the  separate  particle  de  as  noble,  although  this  is 
by  no  means  the  case ;  people  whose  names  begin  with  the  syllable  de, 
write  it  in  two  separate  words:  Derancy  becomes  de  Rancy.  This  is  an 
easy  first  step.  (2)  Names  of  estates  are  freely  appended  to  patronymics, 
at  first  between  modest  brackets:  M.  Oautier  (de  Clagny),  then  as  part  of 
the  real  name:  Durand  d'Aubervilliers ;  then  the  original  name  is  quietly 
dropped :  D.  d'Aubervilliers.  Any  printer  of  visiting  cards  can  confer  no- 
bility for  a  few  francs:  this  is  not  punishable  by  law,  unless  the  assumed 
name  rightfully  belongs  to  another  or  is  used  for  dishonest  purposes. 
(3)  Every  title  that  ever  was  or  came  near  being  in  the  family  is  revived 
without  any  respect  for  genealogical  law.  (4)  Titles  can  be  had  for  cash 
from  certain  needy  foreign  Governments,  among  which  the  Holy  See  io 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  175 

cannot  stem  the  tide :  besides,  they  can  no  longer  afford  to  be 
exclusive.  The  greatest  families  are  linked  with  American 
plutocrats  and  even  with  Jewish  captains  of  finance.  The 
"  scions  of  the  Crusaders "  are  not  degenerate ;  beside  their 
hereditary  taste  and  breeding,  their  love  of  sport  and  their 
cosmopolitan  outlook  make  them  vastly  superior  in  mind  and 
body  to  the  second  generation  of  parvenus.  But,  as  a  class, 
their  glory  has  departed.  It  is  a  significant  fact  that  in  modern 
parlance  the  term  "  bourgeois  "  includes  all  capitalists,  titled  or 
not,  and  that  a  duke  is  now  part  and  parcel  of  the  "  bourgeois  " 
system. 

Whilst  aristocracy  has  lost  its  influence,  democracy  has  not 
yet  fully  asserted  its  power.  All  Frenchmen  are  entitled  to  a 
vote,  without  any  property  qualifications;  yet  the  bourgeois 
have  efficiently  entrenched  themselves  in  all  strategic  positions. 
Direct  universal  suffrage  does  not  apply  to  the  election  of  the 
President  and  of  the  Senate:  no  executive,  administrative,  or 
judiciary  function  is  elective.  Practically  all  deputies,  Socialists 
included,  are,  and  have  always  been,  capitalists,  landowners,  or 
professional  men,  i.e.,  bourgeois.  A  high  school  certificate,  the 
Baccalaureat,  is  required  at  the  entrance  of  every  official  or  pro- 
fessional career;  but  secondary  education  is  not  free,  and  the 
number  of  scholarships  granted  to  the  children  of  the  poor  is  not 
larger  than  it  was  under  the  ancient  regime;  this  is  a  very 
efficient  fence  round  the  bourgeois  preserves.  Another  fence  is 
the  long  period  of  probation,  practically  unremunerated,  in  most 
State  offices  and  in  the  professions;  during  those  years  a  poor 
man's  son  would  starve.  As  late  as  1905  the  sons  of  the 
middle  class,  by  taking  some  degree  which  required  time  and 

the  most  reputable  and  the  most  expensive ;  there  are  Jewish  papal  courts. 
(5)  Handsome  contributions  to  the  monarchical  cause  will  elicit  from  the 
leaders  of  the  movement,  or  even  from  the  secretaries  of  the  pretenders 
themselves,  a  letter  of  acknowledgment  which  is  generally  sufficient  to 
authenticate  the  assumed  name  and  title.  When  the  Foreign  Office  an- 
nounced the  intention  of  looking  into  the  nobiliary  titles  of  its  aristocratic 
diplomats  there  was  such  an  outcry  and  so  many  threats  of  resignation 
that  the  matter  was  dropped.  Likewise  a  proposed  sumptuary  tax-  on 
titles  which  would  have  led  to  an  investigation  of  aristocratic  claims  and 
thus  winnowed  the  chaff  and  grain,  was  defeated  by  a  combination  of 
egualitarians  and  spurious  nobles. 


176     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

money,  but  little  genius,  served  only  one  year  in  the  army, 
whilst  the  majority  of  their  poorer  compatriots  had  to  give  five 
and  three  years  of  their  young  manhood.  The  social  line 
between  smock-frocks  and  frock-coats  is  much  sharper  than 
in  America,  where  many  a  wealthy  man  remembers  his  blue-jean 
days. 

But  there  is  no  question  of  a  conflict  between  the  "  masses  " 
and  the  "  classes."  The  bourgeoisie  itself  is  legion.  Any  one 
who  wears  decent  clothes  and  uses  decent  French  is  a  bourgeois. 
The  ruling  class  is  so  huge  that  it  has  to  be  subdivided:  the 
French  distinguish  the  lower,  the  middle,  and  the  upper 
bourgeoisie.  The  lo'wer  stratum  is  not  within  easy  reach  of  the 
toilers  themselves:  a  grimy  face,  horny  hands,  and  a  rough 
tongue,  are  serious  disqualifications;  but  it  is  freely  open  to 
their  sons.  Peasants  and  mechanics  all  over  the  country  work 
themselves  to  death  and  deny  themselves  everything  that  their 
son  may  study  and  become  a  "  monsieur  " — an  underpaid  State 
official  or  teacher.  It  takes  more  money,  ambition,  or  luck — 
generally  a  second  generation — to  prepare  a  professor,  a  lawyer, 
or  a  doctor.  To  these  all  hopes  are  open:  the  Presidency  of 
the  Eepublic,  the  Academy,  and  even,  if  they  have  more 
cleverness  than  backbone,  the  sacrosanct  gates  of  the  Faubourg 
Saint-Germain ;  for  aristocratic  traditions  are  in  need  of  talented 
plebeian  defenders. 

French  social  life  is  still  ruled  by  the  old  feudal  prejudice  that 
manual  labour  is  servile,  and  even  that  any  gainful  occupation 
is  demeaning.  The  French  ideal  is  not  so  much  wealth  as 
freedom  from  ignoble  toil.  We  need  hardly  say  that  this  con- 
ception does  not  spring  from  laziness,  for  French  industry  is 
proverbial.  Throughout  the  nineteenth  century  every  small 
manufacturer  or  tradesman  aspired  to  the  moment  when  he  could 
abandon  his  business,  which  he  really  loved,  and,  on  a  minimum 
competency,  set  up  as  a  gentleman.  This  trait  is  by  no  means 
new:  M.  Jourdain,  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  ago,  was 
ashamed  of  his  father's  trade.  But  until  the  Revolution  this 
tendency  was  checked  by  the  very  hierarchization  of  society, 
which  made  the  upper  reaches  almost  unattainable  to  the  greatest 
number;  so  that  there  were  bourgeois  dynasties,  not  only 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  177 

resigned  to  their  position,  but  proud  of  their  traditions  in  their 
hereditary  line  of  business.  After  1789,  everybody's  secret  idea 
was  to  rank  among  the  spenders. 

This  social  prejudice  against  producers  has  far-reaching  con- 
sequences. First  of  all,  the  limitation  of  the  offspring;  every 
one  wants  his  son  to  be  a  gentleman  as  soon  as  possible,  and 
one  gentleman  in  the  family  is  all  that  an  average  household  can 
afford.  The  eldest  son's  privilege  has  thus  been  restored,  in 
spite  of  the  law,  through  the  preventive  suppression  of  younger 
sons.  Then,  as  State  offices  and  the  professions  are  the  most 
direct  avenues  to  bourgeois  respectability,  they  are  encumbered 
with  aspiring  young  men,  whilst  agriculture,  commerce,  industry, 
and  labour  are  deprived  of  their  natural  leadership.  The  work 
of  material  production,  thus  despised,  is  too  often  left  to  narrow- 
minded  and  sordid  petty  capitalists,  thrifty  and  hard-working 
enough,  but  deficient  in  foresight  and  enterprise.  Meanness 
may  be  as  bad  a  source  of  extravagance  as  reckless  daring;  the 
business  as  well  as  the  national  affairs  of  France,  since  the 
triumph  of  the  middle  class,  have  too  often  been  conducted  in  a 
"  petit  bourgeois  "  spirit  which  is  at  the  same  time  stingy  and 
wasteful. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  is  much  to  be  said  in  favour  of  the 
French  turn  of  mind.  The  excessive  caution  shown  in  economic 
activities  gave  France  wonderful  financial  stability,  even  in  the 
midst  of  the  worst  crises.  The  more  go-ahead  nations — America. 
England,  Germany — have  all  been  compelled,  in  time  of  stress, 
to  borrow  from  the  inexhaustible  "  woollen  stockings "  of  the 
French  peasants.  This  cautious  method  is  tolerably  well 
adapted  to  an  old  country  which  has  few  natural  resources  still 
untapped.  Socially,  there  are  advantages  in  the  aristocratic 
prejudice  which  ranks  the  spender  higher  than  the  toiler.  There 
is  in  France  an  immense  class  which  is  keenly  bent  on  money- 
getting,  but  which  considers  money  as  a  means  for  securing 
independence,  not  as  an  end  in  itself.  The  disinterested  and 
cultured  public  is  unusually  large,  and,  as  H.  G.  Wells  pointed 
out,  a  French  bookshop,  by  the  side  of  licentious  literature,  will 
offer  a  wealth  of  thoughtful  works  hard  to  match  in  any  country : 
this  is  the  bright  side  of  the  "  gentlemanly  ideal." 


178     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

Finally,  it  must  be  said  that  these  conditions  show  signs  of 
rapid  and  accelerating  transformation.  The  development  of 
scientific  industry,  the  keenness  of  international  competition,  are 
driving  out  the  dull  and  plodding  capitalist  of  old,  as  well  as  the 
would-be  gentleman  of  leisure;  and  they  are  giving  rise  to  a 
new  race  of  energetic  business  men  proud  of  their  business. 
The  corresponding  drawback  is  that  industry  and  commerce 
on  the  large  scale  will  no  longer  be  accessible  to  the  sons  and 
grandsons  of  the  people,  and  that  a  new  feudalism  is  fast  arising. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  best  of  the  labourers,  no  longer  lured  by 
the  possibility  of  entering  the  bourgeoisie,  will  devote  their 
energies  to  the  interests  of  their  own  people.  In  a  keen  war  of 
the  classes,  rather  than  in  the  present  system  of  permeable 
hierarchy,  may  be  found  the  salvation  of  twentieth-century 
France. 

§  6.  CULTURE. 

The  realistic  spirit  which  we  have  attempted  to  define  in  a 
preceding  chaper  remained  the  dominant  influence  during  the 
first  twenty  years  of  the  present  Republic.  But  the  influence 
of  the  "Terrible  Year"  must  be  noted.  It  brought  about  a 
recrudescence  of  pessimism  and  scepticism.  Towards  the  close 
of  the  Empire  idealism  was  reviving  under  new  forms :  faith  in 
science;  the  peace  movement,  with  Passy,  Gratry,  Loyson, 
Dunant ;  even  the  International  Working  Men's  Association,  were 
signs  that  the  age  of  pure  materialism  and  moral  depression 
would  soon  be  over.  But  the  war  broke  out;  after  the  downfall 
of  their  "  aggressor  "  Napoleon,  the  Germans  continued  their 
relentless  advance;  victorious,  they  plundered  and  slandered 
their  foe,  ascribing  the  brutal  victory  of  sheer  numbers  to  moral 
rectitude  and  intellectual  superiority.  Then  came  the  Commune 
and  the  carnival  of  arson  of  the  bloody  week :  it  seemed  as  though 
society  were  rocking  on  its  foundations.  Paris  had  twice  been 
conquered,  and  Paris  was  the  New  Jerusalem  of  democracy. 
Worst  of  all,  perhaps,  was  the  fact  that  no  immediate  regenera- 
tion followed  the  disasters.  France  recovered,  she  was  not  born 
anew.  The  nation  continued  its  humdrum  existence,  amid  the 
squabbles  of  parties.  The  hopes  of  revenge  had  to  be  given 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  179 

up.*  When  the  dreams  of  palingenesis  through  Catholicism,  or 
monarchy,  or  democracy,  or  socialism,  or  military  victory,  grew 
fainter  and  vanished,  France  was  left  a  sadder  nation — and  a 
wiser  one,  if  true  wisdom  can  exist  without  a  lodestar. 

Taine  and  Kenan,  the  leaders  of  French  thought,  were  deeply 
affected.  Neither  had  been  a  democrat :  both  became  reactionists. 
Taine  spent  the  last  twenty  years  of  his  life  on  his  bulky  and 
powerful  arraignment  of  modern  France,  Les  Origines  de  la 
France  Contemporaine.  His  morbid  imagination,  the  result  of 
an  indomitable  will  hampered  at  every  turn  by  an  ailing  body, 
found  full  scope  in  this  gloomy  masterpiece.  In  a  crescendo  of 
darkness  he  described  the  ancient  regime  as  rotten  to  the 
marrow,  the  Jacobin  Eevolution  as  a  combination  of  intellectual 
foolishness  and  tigerish  rage,  Napoleon  as  a  monster  of  selfish- 
ness and  ferocity.  This  sombre  turn  of  mind  is  exactly  the  same 
that  we  find  in  "  naturalistic  "  literature,  in  "  slices  of  life  "  and 
the  "  cruel  "  plays  of  Henri  Becque,  in  the  pathological  romances 
of  Zola.  If  some  of  the  strongest  and  best-intentioned  writers 
wallowed  in  filth  and  called  it  "science"  or  "nature,"  this 
delusion  was  evidently  a  form  of  disease,  the  result  of  repeated 
shocks.  Not  only  because  her  eastern  frontier  is  gaping,  but 
because  her  very  soul  is  veiled  with  gloom,  can  modern  France 
be  called  a  "  wounded  nation." 

A  second  form  of  disease,  more  insidious,  was  the  amiable 
Pyrrhonism  affected  by  Kenan  in  the  last  fifteen  years  of  his  life. 
Cynicism,  however  courteous  and  smiling  it  may  be,  is  but  a 
mask  for  despair.  Kenan  had  renanized  before  1870:  but 
earnestness  was  still  predominant  in  him ;  after  1871  he  seemed 
to  sink  deeper  and  deeper  into  universal  indulgence  and  irremedi- 
able flippancy.  He  apologized  to  Beranger's  "God  of  Good 
Fellows,"  a  "  good,  easy-going  little  god,"  whom  he  had  bitterly 
denounced  twenty  years  before.  His  "  transcendental  disdain  " 
assumed  the  shape  of  continuous  irony,  which  spared  neither 
goodness  nor  truth,  and  seemed  to  respect  sensuous  beauty  and 

•  Even  at  present  one  still  hears  occasionally  of  "  la  revanche," 
especially  east  of  the  Rhine,  where  it  is  a  bugbear  carefully  preserved  by 
the  militarist  Note  that  "  revanche  "  does  not  mean  strictly  "  revenge," 
but  rather  "  getting  even,"  or  still  better  "  getting  back  one's  own," 


180     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

pleasure  alone.  Renanism,  we  sincerely  believe,  was  superficial 
in  Renan  himself.  He  remained  faithful  to  his  heavy,  self- 
appointed  task  of  scholarly  research,  and  published  just  before 
his  death  his  "thoughts  of  1848,"  The  Future  of  Science, 
his  first  and  last  confession  of  faith.  But  the  disease,  slight  in 
the  master,  spread  to  minds  of  less  resisting  texture,  and  laid 
them  waste.  In  Anatole  France  and  Jules  Lemaitre,  Renanism 
had  exquisite  graces,  and  did  not  permanently  stifle  conscience. 
In  the  first  works  of  Maurice  Barres  it  is  simply  exasperating, 
and  it  became  positively  nauseous  in  numberless  literary 
anarchists,  whose  brood  is  not  extinct. 

This  pessimism,  either  sombre  or  flippant,  found  its  expression 
in  the  popular  delusion  of  decadence,  which  the  French  enter- 
tained and  spread  abroad  during  the  twenty  years  of  Opportunist 
rule.  There  is  a  prodigious  literature  in  France,  denouncing  or 
taking  for  granted  the  hopeless  decay  of  the  country  and  the 
race:  a  group  of  poets  even  assumed  the  name  with  a  sort  of 
inverted  pride.  Hardly  anything  in  the  facts  of  national  life 
justified  such  a  verdict.  Military  defeat,  licentious  literature, 
parliamentary  scandals,  and  even  a  falling  birth-rate  are  not 
special  to  France.*  Education  was  spreading;  hygiene  fast 
improving;  the  death-rate  decreasing  steadily;  the  average  span 
of  life  was  lengthened ;  the  stature  of  conscripts  showed  constant 
progress.  Wealth  was  expanding,  new  colonies  were  acquired, 
the  Government  was  free  at  last  from  the  constant  menace  of 
coup  d'etat  or  revolution,  whilst  art,  science,  literature  were  not 
unworthy  of  France's  glorious  traditions.  These  years  of 
national  discouragement  were  in  many  fields  a  period  of  very 
creditable  activity. 

"  Decadence "  was  a  mere  catchword,  used  with  some  com- 
placency by  a  small  cosmopolitan  set  in  Paris,  and  which  did  not 
describe  even  that  set  accurately:  for  corruption  under  the 
Republic  is  hopelessly  mediocre  and  "petit  bourgeois"  com- 
pared with  that  of  Byzantium,  London  under  Charles  II,  or  the 
Regency  of  the  Duke  or  Orleans.  Others  caught  the  infection, 
simply  because  decadence  was  fashionable,  or  because  they  would 

•  Cf.  Jena,  the  Restoration  In  England,  the  rule  of  Walpole,  the  birth- 
rate in  New  England  or  Australia. 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  is! 

rather  slander  themselves  than  keep  their  mouths  shut.  Patriots 
also  took  up  the  cry:  looking  backward,  they  regretted  the  days 
of  bygone  supremacy,  in  the  old  selfish  delusion  that  the 
progress  of  our  neighbours  must  needs  injure  our  own  interests. 
Some,  saner  and  more  generous,  simply  made  use  of  that  ready 
whip  to  lash  their  compatriots  into  greater  activity.  This 
phantom  of  decadence  was  exorcised  during  the  Dreyfus  case. 
France  was  rent  asunder,  but  each  party  became  conscious 
again  of  high  principles  and  inexhaustible  energies.* 

In  the  early  nineties,  as  the  patriarchs  of  realism  were  dis- 
appearing from  the  scene,  a  new  spirit  arose,  which  was  simply  a 
reaction  against  excessive  positivism,  a  return  to  mysticism — 
with  its  usual  train  of  aestheticism  and  sentimentality.  Darwin 
and  Spencer  lost  ground;  the  influences  of  Wagner,  Ibsen, 
Tolstoy  were  syncretically  combined.  The  Pre-Raphaelite  craze 
spread  over  the  Continent.  Even  Emerson  was  pressed  into 
service.f  Anything  to  get  away  from  "  the  troughs  of  Zolaism  "  I 
The  Neo-Catholics,  with  Paul  Desjardins  and  de  Vogue;  the 
Rosicrucians  and  Neo-Magians  with  Sar  Josephin  Peladan; 
Maeterlinck  in  his  early  plays  and  poems;  the  .Symbolists,  the 
Decadents,  with  their  ancestor  Baudelaire  and  their  immediate 
forerunner  Villiers  de  PIsle-Adam :  all  these  offered  a  curious 
blend  of  mystic  aspirations  with  anarchistic  or  reactionary  pose, 
and  one  can  hardly  blame  Dr.  Max  Nordau  for  detecting  in  them 
all  the  stigma  of  degeneration.  Yet  it  was  essential  that  the 
rights  of  the  ideal  should  be  reasserted.  Dr.  Max  Nordau's 
criticism  is  irrefutable,  but,  taken  absolutely,  it  would  destroy 
the  music  of  life  at  the  same  time  as  a  few  morbid  affectations. 
This  neo-romantic  movement  was  still  the  privilege  of  a  few, 
when  the  Dreyfus  crisis  interrupted  its  normal  development.^: 

Th"e  Dreyfus  crisis  was  not  a  new  departure,  but  an  epitome  of 

*  Cf.  the  anthropo-sociological  studies  of  Vacher  de  Lapouge,  In  which 
the  majority  of  the  French  were  declared  racially  inferior  to  the  English ; 
The  Psychological  Laws  of  the  Evolution  of  Peoples,  by  Gustave  Le  Bon ; 
later,  the  Causes  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Supremacy,  by  Demolins. 

t  Abb6  Victor  Charbonnel. 

J  An  important  symptom  of  the  reaction  against  positivism,  in  a  man 
of  the  dogmatic  type  in  whom  no  sign  of  looseness  or  degeneration  could 
be  found,  was  BrunetiSre's  famous  phrase :  "  the  bankruptcy  of  science." 


182     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

all  previous  struggles  between  authority  and  liberty.  France 
lived  over  again  the  fight  against  Charles  X  and  the  "  Congrega- 
tion/' the  Roman  Question  of  1849,  the  battle  for  and  against 
Duruy  at  the  close  of  the  Empire,  the  two  conflicts  known  as 
"the  Moral  Order"  and  "the  Sixteenth  of  May"  under 
MacMahon.  All  the  forces  of  conservation,  as  we  have  said — 
property,  patriotism  as  embodied  in  the  army,  religion  as  em- 
bodied in  the  Catholic  Church — were  arrayed  against  all  the 
forces  of  Revolution — Protestantism,  Freethought,  science, 
socialism.  This  glorious  conflagration  of  ideas  and  passions, 
this  dramatic  review  of  France's  cultural  history  for  the  last 
hundred  and  fifty  years,  had  a  unique  educative  value;  but  it 
brought  no  new  message.  On  the  contrary,  its  retrospective 
character  was  shown  by  the  revival  of  half-forgotten  fossils :  even 
old  Voltaire  was  galvanized  on  behalf  of  the  Cause.*  When  the 
actual  strife  was  over,  it  was  realized  that  individualistic 
democracy  of  the  Clemenceau  brand,  or  materialistic,  pseudo- 
scientific  free-thought,  were  no  longer  the  powers  for  progress 
they  thought  themselves  to  be.  It  took  several  dismal  years  to 
disentangle  the  temporary  alliances  made  during  the  Dreyfus 
case:  years  of  disheartening  squabbles  and  slowly  sinking  hopes. 
Now  French  life  seems  to  be  resuming  its  normal  course. 
And  this  course  may  be  defined  as  the  resultant  of  the  two 
tendencies :  positivism,  but  divorced  from  dogmatic  materialism ; 
and  the  neo-mysticism  of  the  nineties,  but  freed  from  the  affecta- 
tions and  excesses  inevitable  in  a  new  movement.  The  tone  of 
French  thought  at  present  is  curiously  anti-rationalistic :  it  is  a 
blend  of  realism  and  faith,  which  gradually  approximates  the 
Anglo-Saxon  standard.  Of  this  tendency,  William  James  and 
Henri  Bergson  are  the  prophets,  and  if  labels  are  judged  indis- 
pensable, empirical  idealism,  or  pragmatism,  will  do  as  well 
as  any.  The  same  spirit  prevails  in  the  Modernist  school, 
among  the  Neo-Traditionalists  of  "  L' Action  Franchise,"  the 
social-Catholics  of  Sangnier's  "  Furrow,"  the  Protestant  group 
"  Faith  and  Life  " ;  it  is  particularly  clear  in  the  philosophy  of 
the  Syndicalist  movement  as  expounded  by  G.  Sorel.  Each 

•  A  good,    popular  collection   of  eighteenth-century   reprints   was  pub- 
lished by  Cornet  at  Angers. 


THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870-1913  183 

school,  each  period  in  the  past,  has  had  a  watchword  or  a  catch- 
word: for  Voltaire,  this  was  "reason";  for  Rousseau, 
"  nature  " ;  for  Robespierre,  "  virtue  " ;  for  Napoleon,  "  glory  " ; 
under  the  Restoration,  "  tradition " ;  for  the  Romanticists, 
"  passion,"  and  later  "  human  brotherhood " ;  for  the  mid- 
century  Philistine,  "  common  sense  "  and  "  progress  " ;  from 
1850  to  1890,  in  the  writings  of  Taine,  Renan,  Zola,  in  official 
speeches  under  the  Republic,  on  the  lips  of  Homais's  successors, 
it  was  "  science."  At  present  it  is  "  life."  Everything  is  a 
"  life  " ;  not  something  to  be  thought  or  felt  about,  but  spon- 
taneously acted.  There  are  dangers  in  this  new  doctrine.  It 
makes  for  loose  thinking:  "life"  is  the  easiest  justification 
ever  devised  for  inconsistencies  and  prejudices.  It  is  the 
essential  privilege  of  man,  even  though  it  be  his  curse — that  he 
lives  consciously,  and  believes  that  he  can  alter  his  course,  in 
some  measure,  according  to  his  thought.  Practical  Roman- 
ticism is  an  admirable  instrument  to  free  men's  minds  from 
artificial  fetters :  yet  liberation  is  but  half  the  task  of  philosophy, 
and  it  remains  to  be  seen  what  discipline  the  new  spirit  will 
provide.* 

•  The  author  Is  keenly  conscious  that  this  rough  sketch  of  political, 
social,  and  cultural  conditions  In  present-day  France  cannot  satisfy  any 
thoughtful  reader.  His  intention — Deo  volente — is  to  develop  several  of 
the  points  barely  alluded  to  in  this  chapter  in  a  subsequent  study  of 
"Problems  of  Contemporary  France." 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

G.  HAXOTAUX.     Contemporary   Prance.     Tr.    J.    C.    Tarver.     4   vols.     8vo. 

Constable,  Westminster,   1903-9.     (Histoire  de  la  France  Contempo- 

raine.     Combet,  Paris.) 

E.  ZEVORT.     Histoire  de  la  Seme  Rgpublique.     4  vols.     8vo.     Paris. 
E.  A.  VIZETELLY.     Republican  France,  1870-1912.     Her  presidents,  states- 
men, policy,  vicissitudes  and  social  life.     Small.     1913. 
J.  C.  BRACQ.     France  under  the  Republic.     8vo.     376  pp.     Scribners,  New 

York.     1910.      (Naively  partisan.) 
J.    REINACH.     Histoire    de    1'Affaire    Dreyfus.     5    vols.     Revue    Blanche 

and  Fasquelle.     1901-5. 
P.  and  V.  MARGTJERITTE.     Petite  Histoire  de  la  Guerre  de  1870.     Chamerot, 

Paris.     1902. 
E.  ZOLA.     La  Debacle,  Les  Trois  Villes,  Les  Quatre  Evangiles   (Charpen- 

tier). 
P.   and  V.   MAHOUERITTE.     Une  Epoque:   Le  Desastre,   Les  Braves  Gens, 

Les  Trongons  du  Glaive,  La  Commune.     4  vols.     Plon.     1893-1904. 
A.    FRANCE.     Histoire    Contemporaine :    L'Orme   du    Mail,    Le    Mannequin 

d'Osier,  L'Anneau  d'Amfithyste.  M.  Bergeret  a  Paris.     4  vols.     L6vy. 

1897-1901. 


184 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE 

V.   THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC,  1870. 

1870  September  4.     Pall  of  the  Empire.     Government  of  National  De- 

fence. 

1871  January    28.     Capitulation    of    Paris.     Preliminaries    of    Peace. 

National  Assembly. 
March     18     to     May     22.     The     Commune.      (May     22-28.     The 

"Bloody  Week.") 
May  10.     Treaty  of  Frankfort. 
1871-73  Thiers  1st  President  of  the  Republic. 

1873-79  MacMahon    2nd    President.     The    Government    of    Moral    Order. 
Attempted  restoration. 

1875  Constitution. 

1876  Elections:  Senate  divided,  House  Republican. 

1877  May  16.     MacMahon  dismisses  Simon  (Republican).     De  Broglie 

Ministry.     Chamber   dissolves.     Death    of   Thiers.     New    Re- 
publican victories  at  the  elections. 

1878  Exposition. 

1879  MacMahon  resigns.     Jules  GrSvy   3rd  President    (1879-86-87). 
1879-81  Education  laws.     Anti-clericalism.     Beginning  of  colonial  expan- 
sion (Ferry). 

1886  Expulsion  of  French  Pretenders. 
1887-91  Boulanger  Agitation. 

1887  Grgvy    resigns    (Wilson    scandals).     Sadi    Carnot    4th    President. 

1887-94. 

1889  Height  and  collapse  of  Boulangism.     Exposition. 
1892-93  Panama  scandals. 

1894   Sadi    Carnot   assassinated.     Casimir-P£rier   5th   President. 

1894  Captain  Dreyfus  condemned  for  treason. 

1895  President    Casimir-Pe'rier    resigns.     Felix    Faure    6th    President. 

1895-99. 

1897  Official  Proclamation  of  Franco-Russian  Alliance. 
1898-99  Dreyfus  crisis.     "Nationalist"  and  Anti-Semitic  Movements. 
1899  Fashoda  incident. 
1899  Fglix  Faure  dies   suddenly.     Emile  Loubet   7th  President,   1899- 

1906. 

1899-1902  Waldeck-Rousseau  Ministry.     Association  law. 
1902-4  Combes  Ministry:  Anti-clerical  policy. 

1903  Franco-British    Arbitration    Treaty,    1904.     Anglo-French    Agree- 
ment.    Entente  Cordiale  (Delcassg). 

1905  Separation  of  Church  and  State. 

1906  Armand  Fallieres  8th  President,  1906-13. 

19 56  Morocco  difficulty  with  Germany.     Algeciras  Convention. 
1906  Final  decision  on  Dreyfus  Case.     Clgmenceau  Ministry. 
1911  Renewed  difficulties  with  Germany.     Morocco-Congo  Agreement. 
1913  Raymond  Poincarfi  9th  President 


185 


CHAPTER   VI 
THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION 

§  1.  FORMATION  AND  DEFORMATION  OF  BOURGEOIS  LIBERALISM. 

The  Revolution — Property  a  sacred  right — Suppression  of  feudal- 
ism— Importance  of  that  precedent — Absolute  individualism  (Cha- 
pelier  law). 

The  Empire:  liberalism  degenerates  into  class  legislation — Na- 
poleon restores  bourgeois  corporations — The  "livret" — Article  1781. 

Survival  of  the  Compagnonnages — The  mutual  help  societies. 

THE  Revolution  of  1789  was  even  more  radical  in  its  economic 
and  social  reforms  than  in  pure  politics.  The  old  regime  was 
characterized  by  arbitrary  paternalism  in  the  central  government ; 
by  innumerable  traces  of  feudalism  in  the  tenure  and  exploi- 
tation of  land ;  by  a  complicated  system  of  guilds  regulating  and 
monopolizing  each  craft  and  trade.  Authority,  heredity,  privi- 
lege, were  thus  its  foundations.  Although  it  had  victoriously 
resisted  the  onslaught  of  Turgot  in  1776,  this  economic  order 
was  visibly  crumbling  into  decay:  the  central  government  was 
as  inefficient  as  it  was  meddlesome,  feudalism  had  lost  every 
semblance  of  justification,  and  the  guilds  hampered  industry 
and  commerce.  On  August  4,  1789,  the  nobility  and  the  clergy 
gave  up  their  feudal  rights  and  privileges:  it  was,  in  theory  at 
least,  the  end  of  the  ancient  regime.  On  August  23rd,  by  the 
Declaration  of  the  Rights  of  Man,  the  new  order  was  formally 
established  on  the  basis  of  equal  individual  rights. 

But   property   was   expressly   declared   to   be   one   of   those 

"  inalienable   and   sacred   rights."     The   Constituent   Assembly 

refused  to  follow  the  philosophers  who,  after  Rousseau,  had 

maintained  that  "exclusive  property  was  a  theft  in  a  state  of 

186 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  187 

nature."  *  Nor  can  it  be  said  that  the  Legislative  Assembly 
and  the  Convention  were  any  more  inclined  to  doubt  the  abso- 
lute character  of  individual  property.  The  Government  held 
the  vast  forfeited  estates  of  the  clergy  and  the  emigrant  nobles ; 
but  permanent  collective  ownership  was  not  seriously  thought  of. 
Free  distribution  of  land  to  the  poor  ("  the  agrarian  law  ")  was 
severely  discountenanced,  death  being  the  penalty  of  whoever 
should  propose  such  a  measure.  In  1796-97  it  was  rumoured 
that  Caius  Gracchus  Baboeuf  and  his  "  Club  of  Equals,"  the 
organized  Communists,  had  secured  the  support  of  17,000 
working  men  in  Paris.  But  this  was  a  demagogic  rather  than 
a  socialistic  movement,  a  last  effort  of  the  Jacobin  populace  of 
the  suburbs  against  the  Thermidorian  and  Directorial  reaction, 
and  its  motto  was  the  old  cry :  "  Bread  and  the  Constitution 
of  1793."  Whatever  may  have  been  the  number  of  secret 
adherents,  the  conspiracy  was  easily  foiled,  and  when  Babceuf 
was  executed  Paris  did  not  stir.  Messrs.  Lichtenberger  and 
Jean  Jaures,  who  have  studied  the  period  from  this  special 
point  of  view,  come  to  the  conclusion  that  socialism,  at  the  time 
of  the  Revolution,  was  practically  non-existent. 

Property  was  considered  as  a  right,  not  as  a  privilege,  because 
it  was  held  to  be  freely  accessible  to  all,  and  not  to  limit  the 
liberty  of  others.  This  view  was  in  the  main  perfectly  correct 
at  the  time.  Before  the  advent  of  expensive  machinery  and 
world-wide  trade,  agriculture,  industry,  commerce  were  local, 
individual,  rudimentary  affairs.  Any  peasant,  any  working 
man,  endowed  with  energy,  thrift,  and  foresight  could  acquire 
the  tools  necessary  to  his  labour  as  well  as  the  skill  to  use 
them.  What  the  ancient  regime  denied  him  was  the  chance  of 
using  his  tools  and  his  skill  independently  and  for  his  own 
benefit  Although  there  were  a  number  of  peasant  proprietors 
before  1789,  the  ownership  of  land  was  chiefly  the  privilege  of 
the  nobility  and  clergy.  The  guilds  had  become  exclusive  and 
hereditary  aristocracies,  so  that  it  was  exceedingly  difficult  for 
an  artisan  to  become  a  master.  The  Revolution  gave  .the 
peasant  the  possibility  of  acquiring  as  much  land  as  he  could 

•  Brissot  de  Warville :  Recherches  Philosophiques  sur  le  Droit  de  Pro- 
prtete  et  le  Vol.  1780.  Cf.  also  Morelly,  Pauchet,  Mably.and  even  Mirabeau. 


188     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

till,  and  the  workman  the  right  of  opening  a  small  shop  on  his 
own  account.  It  thus  sought  to  create  a  regime  of  equal 
opportunity  and  fair  competition,  the  ideal  of  the  "laissez- 
faire"  school.  In  their  fear  lest  the  abolished  guilds  should 
rise  again  in  a  new  guise,  the  members  of  the  Constituent 
Assembly  went  to  the  extreme  of  forbidding  any  kind  of  asso- 
ciation among  people  engaged  in  the  same  trade  "  for  the 
defence  of  their  alleged  common  interests."  *  No  corporation  of 
any  kind  should  stand  between  the  individual  and  the  State. 

But  whilst  the  Revolutionists  were  firm  believers  in  economic 
liberty  and  private  property,  some  of  their  most  important 
measures  can  be  used  as  precedents  by  modern  socialists.  The 
wholesale  confiscation  of  estates  belonging  to  enemies  of  the 
Revolution  is  not  the  clearest  case  in  point:  it  was  an  act  of 
war,  and  in  war  the  ordinary  principles  of  justice  are  suspended. 
The  assumption  by  the  State  of  all  Church  property  was  nought 
but  a  desperate  expedient.  The  plea  that  the  clergy  could  no 
longer  hold  any  possession,  since  it  had  ceased  to  exist  as  a 
separate  order,  was  a  bold  piece  of  sophistry:  for  individual 
churches,  abbeys,  and  monasteries  still  existed,  and  were  the 
natural  heirs  of  the  abolished  "  order."  Many  feudal  rights 
were  immediately  suppressed  without  compensation,  because 
they  were  traces  of  the  domination  of  one  class  over  another 
(feodalite  dominante)  ;  yet,  whatever  their  origin,  they  were  in 
1789  the  property  of  individuals  whose  interests  were  greatly 
injured  by  their  removal.  Other  rights,  like  perpetual  ground- 
rents,  were  the  result  of  a  contract  between  landowner  and 
tenant  (feodalite  contractante) ;  they  were  to  be  redeemed  at  a 
fair  price.  But,  under  the  Convention  (July  17,  1793),  they 
were  purely  and  simply  abolished,  and  the  very  deeds  on  which 
they  were  based  had  to  be  surrendered  and  destroyed. 

The  lesson  of  French  history,  therefore,  in  contradiction  with 
the  principles  of  French  law,  is  that  private  property  can  be 
confiscated  and  redistributed,  when  it  no  longer  justifies  its 
existence  by  actual  services  to  society.  The  innumerable 
peasant  proprietors,  retail  dealers  and  small  manufacturers  of 
France,  conscious  of  the  revolutionary  origin  of  their  rights, 

•  Chapelier  law  against  coalitions,  1791. 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  189 

lived  for  many  years  in  the  dread  of  a  feudalistic  reaction. 
Since  1848  their  dominant  fear  has  been  that  labour  in  its 
turn  should  challenge  the  legitimacy  of  their  title.  The  pre- 
cedents of  1789-93  have  not  been  lost  on  the  French  pro- 
letariate :  no  wonder  that  they  are  still  haunted  with  dreams  of 
a  new  upheaval  in  which  capitalistic  property  will  be  treated 
with  the  same  disrespect  that  was  shown  to  feudal  property 
a  hundred  and  twenty  years  ago. 

The  consequences  of  this  economic  revolution  are  still  felt. 
France  is  socially  more  conservative  than  England  or  Germany, 
because  the  immense  class  of  petty  capitalists  considers  the 
regime  created  in  1789  as  final.  But  socialism  is  more  radical, 
more  aggressive  than  anywhere  else,  because  every  year,  on  the 
14th  of  July,  the  people  are  reminded  that  "  direct  action  "  did, 
once  before,  change  the  face  of  the  world.* 

The  regime  of  individualistic  liberalism  established  by  the 
Constituent  Assembly  ignored  class  distinctions,  and  was 
theoretically  fair  to  all.  Employers  as  well  as  employees  were 
forbidden  to  form  trade  associations,  and  the  labour  contract  was 
to  be  freely  debated  between  man  and  man.  This  was  fair 
enough  when  each  master  had  only  a  few  working  men  in  his 
pay,  and  perhaps  only  one  skilled  in  each  special  line.  If  the 
master  had  more  reserves,  he  was  also  likely  to  have  more 
obligations,  and  he  was  less  free  to  move  to  a  different  part  of 
the  country.  In  large  shops  the  case  is  different:  each  indi- 
vidual workman  represents  but  a  fraction  of  the  labour  element 
engaged  in  the  business,  whilst  the  owner  or  manager  represents 
the  whole  capital.  None  but  a  grim  ironist  would  dare  to  main- 
tain that  Tom,  Dick,  and  Harry  can  discuss  on  equal  economic 


•  The-  rural  populations  were  the  chief  beneficiaries  of  the  Revolution : 
(a)  feudal  dues  were  abolished  without  compensation;  (b)  a  vast  amount 
of  property  was  thrown  Into  the  market;  (c)  farm  rent,  taxes,  and  the 
price  of  State  property  acquired  by  the  peasants  were  paid  in  "  assignats  " 
(paper  money)  at  their  face  value,  since  assignats  were  legal  currency. 
But  in  payment  for  their  produce,  the  farmers  accepted  assignats  only 
at  the  current  rate,  which  fell  to  1  per  cent,  of  the  nominal  value.  Thus 
a  peasant  whose  year's  rent,  fixed  before  the  crisis,  was  only  600  livres, 
could  sell  a  single  sack  of  wheat  for  1,200  livres.  The  old  landed  pro- 
prietors were,  of  course,  ruined  by  these  conditions. 


190     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-rn  CENTURY 

terms  with  Schneider,  Krupp,  or  Carnegie.  Collective  bargain- 
ing alone  could  restore  equality  between  the  two  factors  capital 
and  labour.  Thus  with  the  development  and  concentration  of 
industry,  the  scales  were  automatically  tipped  in  favour  of  the 
masters.  Under  the  Napoleonic  reaction,  equality  was  deliber- 
ately destro}-ed.  The  Constituent  Assembly  had  suppressed  all 
professional  associations:  Napoleon  restored  all  those  whose 
members  belonged  to  the  bourgeoisie.  The  clergy,  the  judiciary, 
public  education,  were  reconstituted  into  hierarchized  and  closed 
corporations.  Lawyers,  attorneys,  notaries,  bailiffs,  stock- 
brokers, auctioneers,  were  organized  into  monopolistic  "  orders." 
The  practice  of  medicine  and  midwifery,  and  a  number  of 
trades — druggists,  herbalists,  butchers,  bakers,  printers,  book- 
sellers, theatre  directors,  and  manufacturers  of  arms — were 
regulated  by  law  and  protected  by  privileges.  The  Chambers 
of  Commerce  were  revived.  Thus  the  strict  prohibition  of 
industrial  combines  was  no  longer  a  natural  consequence  of  a 
general  policy,  but  an  exception,  and  therefore  an  injustice. 

Furthermore,  whilst  the  combination  ("coalition")  of  working- 
men  for  raising  wages  fell  under  the  law  without  any  exception 
or  qualification,  the  combination  of  employers  for  lowering  wages 
was  punishable  only  if  it  were  found  "  unjust  and  abusive." 
And  the  men  who  were  to  decide  upon  that  point  were  not 
popularly  elected  judges,  as  under  the  Revolution,  but  magistrates 
appointed  by  the  central  government,  and  belonging,  one  and  all, 
to  the  upper  classes.* 

Each  working  man  had  to  carry  with  him  a  book  ("  livret "), 
and  wherever  he  was  employed  he  had  to  get  his  livret  signed 
by  the  head  of  the  police  or  by  the  mayor;  he  was  thus  under 
constant  supervision,  as  if  he  had  been  a  ticket-of-leave  man. 
The  livret  was  an  instrument  of  servitude,  for  the  master  wrote 
down  in  it  the  sums  advanced  on  the  wages;  and  as  long  as 
these  were  not  repaid  in  full,  the  labourer  could  find  no  other 
employment.  A  stroke  of  bad  luck,  an  accident,  an  illness  could 
thus  place  him  at  the  mercy  of  his  master,  and  permanently 
prevent  him  from  seeking  to  better  his  position. 

Whilst  the  rich  were  taking  such  elaborate  precautions  against 
•  Arts.  414,  415,  416  of  the  Penal  Code,  1810. 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  191 

the  dishonesty  of  the  poor,  the  poor,  if  cheated  by  the  rich,  had 
no  legal  means  of  redress;  for  Article  1781  of  the  Civil  Code 
(1804)  provided  that  "the  master's  word  is  taken:  for  the  rate 
of  wages;  the  payment  of  the  salary  of  the  previous  year;  and 
the  advances  on  the  salary  of  the  current  year."  The  subordin- 
ation of  the  working  classes  was  thus  officially  established. 

In  spite  of  the  law,  however,  the  labourers  did  not  remain  abso- 
lutely isolated.  The  old  "  Companionships "  or  Brotherhoods 
(compagnonnage)  had  survived.  As  they  were  secret  societies, 
the  Government  was  almost  powerless  against  them.  They  did 
not  include  the  whole  of  the  industrial  and  commercial  world, 
like  the  old  guilds,  but  only  certain  trades,  and,  in  those  trades, 
only  itinerant  unmarried  working  men,  who  went  from  town  to 
town  and  made  "  the  tour  of  France."  The  companions  pre- 
served jealously  their  ancient  rites  and  insignia,  handed  down,  if 
not  from  the  architects  of  Solomon's  temple,  at  least  from  the 
craftsmen  of  the  late  Middle  Ages.  In  1808  Angouleme  was  the 
scene  of  a  bloody  battle  lasting  a  whole  week,  due  to  the  fact 
that  a  drunken  tanner  had  betrayed  the  secret  of  the  order  to 
the  shoemakers.  Brawls  were  not  infrequent  between  members 
of  rival  societies — "  Children  of  Solomon  "  and  "  Children  of 
Master  James,"  "  Gavots "  and  "  Devoirants " — and  even 
between  different  trades  of  the  same  rite.  The  companions 
treated  the  probationers  or  "  foxes  "  *  with  brutal  injustice.  By 
the  side  of  these  antiquated  ceremonies  and  mediaeval  prejudices, 
the  brotherhoods  had  many  social  advantages.  The  companion 
found  everywhere  comrades  ready  to  help  him  on  his  way,  to 
find  work  for  him,  to  sing  and  carouse  with  him  when  in  health, 
and  to  tend  him  in  sickness.  So  these  secret  orders  were  benefit 
societies  of  a  primitive  type.  They  were  at  the  same  time  the 
prototypes  of  our  labour  unions,  for  occasionally  the  companions 
would,  in  spite  of  the  law,  combine  in  order  to  secure  higher 
wages.  Firms  which,  for  one  reason  or  another,  had  incurred 
their  displeasure  were  "  damned,"  i.e.  boycotted.  It  must  be 
added  that  the  brotherhoods  kept  up  a  certain  professional  and 
moral  standard :  a  worthless  workman  could  not  become  a  cbm- 

*  This  term  "  renard  "  has  recently  been  revived  with  the  meaning:  of 
"  scab." 


192     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

panion.  This  is  probably  the  chief  reason  why,  in  spite  of  their 
occasional  turbulence,  these  societies  were  not  more  ruthlessly 
persecuted  by  the  different  Governments.* 

Under  Napoleon,  and  especially  under  the  Restoration,  it  was 
seriously  proposed  to  revive  the  old  guilds;  but  the  new  prin- 
ciples of  individualism  and  economic  liberalism  were  still  too 
strong  to  allow  of  such  a  backward  step.  One  form  of  pro- 
fessional association,  however,  was  tolerated  and  even  encouraged, 
although  it  fell  under  the  Chapelier  law :  the  friendly,  or  mutual 
help,  societies.  They  took  no  part  in  the  preparation  and  sup- 
port of  strikes :  yet  they  provided  rallying-points  for  the  working 
classes:  they  are,  much  more  than  the  brotherhoods,  the  link 
between  the  guilds  and  the  modern  unions.  In  1806  their 
rapid  extension  seems  to  have  made  the  Imperial  police  uneasy : 
mutual  help  societies  among  men  of  the  same  trade  were  con- 
demned. But  these  associations  seemed  so  harmless  that  the 
police  soon  relaxed  its  rigour.  In  1823,  out  of  160  Mutualites 
in  Paris,  132  were  professional  groups,  with  11,000  adherents.f 

§  2.  THE  JULY  MONARCHY,  1830-48.     GROWTH  OF  MODERN 
SOCIALISM. 

First  development  of  mechanical  industries — "  Resistances  " — The 
Lyons  insurrection — Republican  secret  societies  and  their  socialistic 
tendencies. 

The  Utopian  Socialists:  Saint-Simon,  Fourier,  Cabet,  Louis  Blanc, 
Proudhon. 

The  influence  of  machinery  in  industry  was  not  seriously  felt 
until  the  end  of  the  Restoration:  France  was  in  this  respect 
two  generations  behind  England.^  But  under  Louis-Philippe 
the  transformation  proceeded  apace ;  a  single  workman,  an  appren- 
tice, a  woman,  a  child,  could  now  do  the  work  of  several  artisans. 
As  this  increased  capacity  of  production  was  not  coupled  with  a 
commensurate  development  of  consumption,  great  hardships  fell 

•  Cf.  Agricol  Perdiguier  (Avignonnais  la  Vertu)  :  Le  Livre  du  Com- 
pagnonnage,  1841 ;  Martin  Saint-Lfion,  Le  Compagnonnage,  1901 ;  George 
Sand,  Le  Compagnon  du  Tour  de  France,  1840. 

t  Paul  Louis,  Histoire  du  Mouvement  Syndical  en  France,  p.  77.  Alcan, 
1907. 

Jin  1810  there  were  only  15  steam-engines  in  the  country,  all  but  one 
working  at  low  pressure. 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  193 

to  the  lot  of  the  labourers:  wages  came  down,  and  whole  popu- 
lations were  pauperized.  Discontent  assumed  three  forms: 
strikes,  secret  revolutionary  societies,  and  Utopian  schemes. 

The  July  monarchy  was  a  great  era  of  "resistance."  By 
this  was  meant  the  banding  together  of  the  working  people  in 
order  to  prevent  any  further  lowering  of  their  wages:  a  purely 
defensive  movement,  to  ward  off  the  evil  effects  of  the  introduc- 
tion of  machinery.  Of  these  "  resistances,"  the  most  successful 
was  the  Printers'  Union,  which  in  1843  secured  a  reasonable 
tariff,  revisable  every  five  years.  The  silk  weavers  of  Lyons 
were  not  so  fortunate.  Their  industry,  keenly  sensitive  to 
political  disturbances,  had  been  greatly  injured  by  the  Revolution 
of  1830.  In  October,  1831,  reduced  to  absolute  starvation,  they 
asked  for  a  tariff  of  wages  that  would  enable  them  to  keep  body 
and  soul  together.  The  prefect  thought  he  could  endorse  their 
claims,  and  some  employers  agreed  to  a  minimum  tariff.  But 
the  others  refused  to  abide  by  the  decision,  and  appealed  to  the 
central  government,  which  took  their  side.  This  disappoint- 
ment caused  a  terrible  uprising  of  the  weavers :  for  ten  days 
they  were  masters  of  the  city.  Marshal  Soult  and  the  Duke  of 
Orleans  were  sent  to  restore  order.  This  insurrection,  the  first 
of  that  magnitude  due  to  purely  economic  causes,  placed  the 
modern  social  problem  before  public  opinion  with  dramatic 
effectiveness.  France  rang  with  the  threatening  motto  of  the 
Lyonnese :  "  To  live  by  our  labour,  or  to  die  fighting." 

The  republican  secret  societies,  which  were  planning  a  new 
democratic  revolution,  were  deeply  tinged  with  socialism.  The 
Society  of  the  Rights  of  Man,  for  instance,  in  1833,  gave  as  its 
programme  "  the  sovereignty  of  the  people,  universal  suffrage, 
the  emancipation  of  the  working  classes."  Whilst  the  first 
Lyons  insurrection  had  been  due  solely  to  economic  sufferings, 
the  second,  in  1834,  was  democratic  and  social  in  character.  A 
survivor  of  Babouvism,  Buonarotti,  influenced  the  arch- 
conspirators  of  the  time,  Barbes  and  Blanqui.  A  movement 
planned  by  them  failed  miserably  in  1839 ;  their  "  Society  of 
the  Seasons  "  was  dissolved,  and  many  of  its  members  fled-  "to 
London;  there  they  met  refugees  of  all  nationalities,  among 
whom  was  formed,  in  1840,  the  Communists'  federation.  Karl 


194     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXra  CENTURY 

Marx  joined  this  association  a  few  years  later.  The  historical 
connection  between  the  democratic  tradition  of  1793  and  the 
modern  Socialist  movement  is  undeniable. 

No  relief  was  expected  from  the  Government,  entirely  in  the 
hands  of  the  bourgeoisie.  The  franchise  was  restricted  to  the 
richest  taxpayers,  and  there  were  only  200,000  electors  in  a 
country  of  30,000,000  inhabitants.  This  ruling  class  scouted 
the  idea  of  free- trade,  which  was  contrary  to  their  prejudices  and 
immediate  interests;  but  to  all  the  demands  of  the  working 
people  they  opposed  the  intangible  principle  of  "  economic 
liberty."  When  Arago,  the  great  astronomer,  made  himself  the 
echo  of  popular  discontent,  when  he  said  in  the  Chamber  of 
Deputies  that  it  "  was  necessary  to  organize  labour,"  his  voice 
was  covered  with  angry  interruptions. 

"  Practical  men "  and  economists  of  the  liberal  school  had 
naught  to  offer  but  a  choice  between  smug  optimism,  belied  by 
facts,  and  stony  fatalism.  Before  the  manifest  evils  of  the 
modern  world,  it  was  natural  enough  that  people  should  not  be 
satisfied  with  this  double  confession  of  impotence.  So  they 
listened  to  the  Socialists,  who  promised  the  thing  most  needful 
after  bread :  dreams  of  redemption  from  present  misery.  From 
1825  to  1848  there  was  in  France  an  extraordinary  crop  of 
Utopian  schemes.  Let  us  note  that  this  was  also  the  heyday  of 
romanticism:  sentimental  and  imaginative  socialism  is  simply 
the  manifestation  of  the  Romantic  spirit  in  the  economic  field. 
Many  of  the  great  Romantic  writers — Lamennais,  Lamartine, 
Michelet,  Hugo,  George  Sand — were  deeply  influenced  by 
socialistic  ideas. 

The  earliest  of  these  new  prophets  was  Henri  Saint-Simon. 
He  is  the  type  of  the  erratic  man  of  genius.  Born  in  1760  of 
noble  parentage,  at  sixteen  he  was  a  volunteer  under  Washington, 
and  later  made  plans  for  cutting  the  Isthmus  of  Panama.  He 
grew  rich  in  land  speculations  and  stock-jobbing  under  the 
Revolution,  but  was  imprisoned  at  the  time  of  the  Terror. 
There  it  was  that  he  saw  in  a  vision  his  ancestor,  Charlemagne, 
who  revealed  to  him  his  Messianic  destiny.  After  his  release, 
he  studied  and  travelled,  married,  lived  extravagantly,  divorced, 
and  spent  the  rest  of  his  life  in  philosophic  poverty.  Unable  to 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  195 

write  with  any  method,  he  could  not  reach  the  general  public, 
until  he  won  to  his  cause  Augustin  Thierry,  then  twenty  years  of 
age.  The  future  historian  became  his  "adopted  son"  and 
collaborator.  They  published  a  number  of  periodicals,  Le  Poli- 
tique,  L'Organisateur,  Le  Systeme  Industriel,  Le  Catechisme 
Industriel.  One  article  alone  attracted  some  notice.  In  a 
famous  "Parable"  (1819)  he  drew  a  comparison  between  the 
hypothetical  loss  to  France  of  her  3,000  best  scientists,  artists, 
and  artisans,  and  that  of  the  Duke  of  Angouleme,  the  Duke  of 
Berry,  the  great  officers  of  the  Eoyal  Household,  all  cardinals 
and  archbishops,  and  the  10,000  richest  landowners.  His  point 
was  that  society  was  topsy-turvy,  since  service  and  honour  did 
not  go  hand-in-hand:  a  discovery  for  which  he  was  duly  prose- 
cuted. Pie  died  in  1825,  having  achieved  nothing,  and  leaving 
the  reputation  of  a  crack-brained  Bohemian. 

We  reserve  for  another  chapter  the  discussion  of  his  religious 
message.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  he  asserted,  against  classical 
economists,  that  no  society  could  stand  if  its  spiritual  principles 
and  its  economic  organization  were  not  in  harmony.  When 
brotherly  love  and  pitiless  competition  are  taught  side  by  side, 
discord  and  hypocrisy  are  bound  to  prevail.  Saint-Simon  chose 
fraternity  rather  than  liberty.  In  his  system,  the  world  was  to 
be  governed  by  a  hierarchy  of  priests,  scientists,  and  "  indus- 
trialists "  (producers  of  all  kinds);  but  science  and  industry, 
devoted  to  the  service  of  mankind,  were  holy,  so  that  every  pro- 
fession was  essentially  religious.  The  cardinal  principles  of  the 
new  order  were  tersely  stated  on  the  front  page  of  the  Globe, 
which,  from  1830  to  1832,  was  a  Saint-Simonian  paper: — 

1.  All  social  institutions  must  have  for  their  aim  the  improve- 
ment of  the  moral,  physical,  and  intellectual  condition  of  the 
most  numerous  and  poorest  class. 

2.  -All  birthrights  and  privileges,  without  any  exception,  are 
abolished. 

3.  To  every  man  shall  be  given  according  to  his  capacity,  to 
every  capacity  according  to  its  works. 

These  principles,  the  social  correlatives  of  his  mystic  huiriani- 
tarianism,  were  generous,  but  singularly  vague.  There  was, 
however,  a  practical  side  to  Saint-Simonism.  The  master,  at  a 


196     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

time  when  French  industry  was  still  in  its  infancy,  had  a 
prophetic  vision  of  modern  production,  with  its  scientific  manage- 
ment and  its  unlimited  capacity.  He  communicated  his 
enthusiasm  to  his  disciples — most  of  whom  never  saw  him  in  the 
flesh.  The  Saint-Simonians  preached  the  gospel  of  great  public 
works,  railroads,  maritime  canals,  free-trade.  Father  Enfantin 
himself,  that  strange  combination  of  the  seer  and  the  charlatan, 
thought  of  the  Suez  Canal  and  was  a  capable  railroad  adminis- 
trator.* The  Pereires  became  high  barons  in  the  new  aristocracy 
of  finance  and  founded,  among  other  things,  the  General  Trans- 
atlantic Company.  The  future  Napoleon  III,  although  he  never 
was  formally  a  Saint-Simonian,  shared  most  of  their  ideas;  his 
pamphlet  on  The  Extinction  of  Pauperism  might  have  been 
signed  by  one  of  them,  and  his  reign  was  their  reign.  To  their 
credit  be  it  said  that  these  men,  at  the  height  of  material 
success,  were  still  loyal  to  the  mystic  dream  of  their  youth. 

Fourier  (1772-1837)  was  in  his  own  eyes  the  Newton  of  social 
science,  for  he  had  discovered  that  the  law  of  universal  attraction 
ruled  human  sentiments  and  human  conditions  as  well  as  planets 
and  stars.  His  whole  system  rested  on  sensualism :  a  man  has 
appetites  which  should  be  satisfied  in  the  fullest  and  pleasantest 
manner.  The  first  task  of  the  reformer,  therefore,  is  to  analyze 
human  passions,  and  to  study  their  combinations.  Fourier 
discovers  twelve  major  passions,  which  can  be  combined  in  810 
characteristic  types.  His  psychology  is  fanciful  to  a  degree. 
But  the  fundamental  idea  is  right:  social  organization  should 
rest  on  a  comprehensive  conception  of  human  nature.  The 
great  shortcoming  of  classical  liberalism  was  that  it  had  reduced 
its  homo  economicus  to  a  mere  machine  whose  sole  passion  was 
to  buy  in  the  cheapest  market. 

No  one  of  these  810  types  can  be  fully  himself,  nor  reap  the 
greatest  benefit  from  his  labour,  in  a  state  of  isolation,  or  in 
the  state  of  permanent  warfare  which  we  call  free  competition. 
In  our  present  inorganic  condition,  legitimate  desires  clash,  and 
may  often  be  called  vices.  In  the  free  and  communistic  regime 
of  the  future,  they  will  all  be  harmonized.  Production  will 
be  increased  a  thousandfold  by  the  association  of  efforts. 

•  De  Lesscps  was  directly  Influenced  by  the  Salnt-Slmoniana. 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  197 

Labour  will  no  longer  be  a  curse,  for  it  will  become  attractive 
through  the  free  choice  and  constant  shifting  of  one's  occupa- 
tions. Fourierism  is  merely  an  extreme  and  Utopian  form  of 
"  naturalism,"  the  doctrine  of  Rousseau :  abolish  artificial  restric- 
tions, trust  to  the  instincts,  and  you  will  restore  the  golden  age. 
The  master  boldly  applied  his  principles  to  the  relations  of  the 
sexes,  and  his  "  phanerogamy "  is  but  another  name  for 
promiscuity.*  He  lost  himself  in  extraordinary  cosmogonic 
dreams.  According  to  him,  we  have  gone  through  periods  of 
Edenism,  savagery,  patriarchal  culture,  barbarism,  and  civiliza- 
tion, all  based  on  "  unattractive  industry."  We  are  soon  going 
to  enter  upon  a  second  cycle:  guaranteeism,  socialism,  har- 
monism,  based  on  attractive  industry.  Then  will  come  the 
final  stage  of  complete  harmony,  in  which,  among  other  wonders, 
the  sea  will  be  turned  into  "  a  sort  of  lemonade,"  whilst  a 
constant  aurora  borealis  will  warm  up  the  pole. 

We  can  hardly  understand  the  influence  of  such  extravagant 
fancies  on  men  not  different  from  ourselves,  who  lived  but  a 
short  century  ago.  The  sudden  expansion  of  industry,  the 
French  Revolution,  the  career  of  Napoleon,  the  spread  of 
romanticism,  had  certainly  blurred  the  notion  of  practical 
possibility.  Yet  men  have  always  been  guided  by  dreams. 
What  is  Fourier's  Utopia  but  an  Anti-Apocalypse,  a  vision 
of  material  bliss  instead  of  a  nightmare  of  conflagration?  But 
the  true  cause  of  Fourier's  success,  such  as  it  was,  lay  in  the 
"  unit "  idea  applied  to  social  reform.  Since  there  are  only 
810  characters,  a  phalanx  of  that  number  (or  rather  1,800  with 
old  men  "  over  120  "  and  children  under  4)  will  be  sufficient 
to  realize  Harmony  on  about  a  square  league  of  ground.  This 
phalanx  would  live  in  a  handsome  and  comfortable  building — 
farm-,  workshop,  and  palace  combined — called  the  Phalanstery. 
In  this  association  capital  and  talent  as  well  as  labour  would 
have  their  proper  reward.  The  experiment  would  therefore  be 
an  easy  one  to  make,  and  "  within  two  years  "  of  the  foundation 
of  the  first  settlement,  the  world,  dazzled  by  the  magnificent 
results  of  association  and  attractive  labour,  would  be  converted 

*  As  a  concession  to  the  prejudices  of  the  times,  he  postponed  indefinitely 
the  establishment  of  phanerogamy. 


198     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

from  its  present  civilization  into  the  next  higher  state.  Now 
community  life  has  undoubted  advantages,  on  the  ideal  side 
as  well  as  on  the  practical:  the  Catholic  orders,  against  which 
legislation  has  proved  powerless,  axe  a  proof  of  this  perennial 
appeal.  Many  Fourierists  adopted  that  queer  faith  simply 
because  it  promised  the  prompt  realization  of  their  fraternal 
dreams.  In  France,  Fourier  and  his  disciple  Victor  Considerant 
met  with  no  material  success.  Two  attempts,  at  Conde-sur- 
Vesgres  and  at  Citeaux,  collapsed  before  the  buildings  were  fairly 
under  way.  In  America,  on  virgin  soil,  Fourierism  was  one 
of  the  many  sects  which  started  socialistic  communities.  The 
famous  Brook  Farm,  during  the  last  two  years  of  its  existence, 
was  reorganized  on  phalansterian  lines.* 

With  Cabet  the  riotous  fancy  of  the  early  Socialists  begins  to 
cool  down.  His  Icaria  (1840)  is  still  a  pure  Utopia,  but  one  of 
a  plain  and  even  commonplace  type.  Cabet  spent  some  time  in 
London  after  1834,  and  his  work  shows  the  direct  influences 
of  Sir  Thomas  More  and  Robert  Owen.  In  1847^8  he  tried 
to  realize  his  scheme,  at  first  in  Texas,  then  at  Nauvoo,  the 
former  Mormon  colony ;  both  attempts  ended  in  failure.  Cabet's 
Icaria  and  New  Christianity,  devoid  of  originality  and  written  in 
accessible  style,  were  widely  read  by  the  working  classes,  and 
contributed  to  the  formation  of  genuine  socialism. 

It  is  often  taken  for  granted  that  all  pre-Marxian  critics 
of  capitalism  were  sentimental  and  Utopian.  Yet  this  is  hardly 
true  of  Louis  Blanc  and  Proudhon,  both  men  of  no  mean  ability 
and  a  positive  turn  of  mind.  Louis  Blanc,  small  in  stature, 
scrupulously  neat  in  appearance,  a  purist  in  the  use  of  language, 
and  a  historian  to  whose  care  and  fairness  his  successors  in  the 
same  field  have  paid  high  tribute,  f  did  not  base  his  doctrines  on 
any  financial  revelation.  Like  Arago,  he  belived  that  the  indus- 
trial world  was  suffering  from  its  anarchy,  that  "  labour  should 
be  organized."  %  After  ages  of  which  "  authority  "  and  "  indi- 

•  A  Fourierlst,  Godin,  who  had  become  a  rich  manufacturer  of  stoves 
and  cooking:  utensils,  turned  his  factory,  at  Quise  (Aisne)  into  a 
"  Famillstftre."  This  is  a  sort  of  adaptation  of  Fourierism  to  the  frame- 
work of  modern  capitalistic  production.  The  "  Familistfire "  is  still  in 
activity.  Cf.  the  Fourierist  elements  in  Zola's  "  Gospel  " :  Work. 

t  Aulard. 

J  The  Organization  of  Labour,  1840. 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  199 

vidualism  "  respectively  were  the  key-words,  it  was  time  for  the 
era  of  "  fraternalism  "  to  open.  Competition  leads  to  increased 
production,  but  also  to  the  pauperization  of  the  masses,  who, 
producing  more,  yet  are  able  to  consume  but  a  diminishing  pro- 
portion of  the  fruit  of  their  labour.  Association  would  be  the 
remedy:  a  state  of  society  in  which  every  one  would  receive 
according  to  his  needs  and  give  according  to  his  power;  in 
which  all  salaries  would  be  equal — for  greater  aptitudes  give  you 
no  greater  rights,  only  greater  duties;  in  which  all  industrial 
functions  would  be  elective,  in  the  same  way  as  political  offices. 
So  far,  we  are  still  in  Utopia.  But  Louis  Blanc  had  a  tangible 
scheme  to  pass  from  the  capitalistic  regime  to  the  State  socialism 
of  his  dreams.  National  workshops  should  be  established  which, 
on  account  of  their  immense  superiority,  would  soon  drive  out 
competition.  The  employers,  threatend  with  ruin,  would  of 
their  own  accord  request  the  State  to  purchase  their  industries. 
The  growing  impossibility  of  reinvesting  the  capital  thus  pro- 
cured, and  the  suppression  of  heritage  in  the  collateral  lines, 
would  soon  cause  the  former  bourgeois  class  to  disappear.  The 
delusion  was  to  expect  that  in  an  age  imbued  with  individualistic 
prejudices,  communistic  workshops  would  at  once  prove  more 
efficient  than  those  in  which  everything  is  sacrificed  to  cheapness 
and  abundance  of  production. 

P.  J.  Proudhon,  the  most  important  and  most  misunderstood 
of  the  early  French  socialists,  was  neither  a  utopist  nor  a  sophist. 
He  claims,  in  agreement  with  Auguste  Comte,  that  after  the 
epochs  of  religion  and  metaphysics,  science  alone  should  prevail, 
and  the  Eomanticists  of  political  economy  had  no  deadlier  critic 
than  he.  To  intense  earnestness,  rugged  eloquence,  and  a  rare 
power  of  logical  reasoning  he  joined  extensive  and  accurate  in- 
formation. But,  a  man  of  the  people,  self-taught,  passionate, 
uncritical,  he  wielded  with  dangerous,  clumsy  strength  the  double- 
edged  tool  of  Hegelian  dialectics,  which  he  had  rediscovered 
unaided.  Thus  his  thought,  sane  and  moderate  on  the  whole, 
gave  the  impression  of  a  dark  chaos  shot  through  with  such  lurid 
lights  as  his  two  famous  aphorisms :  God  is  evil ;  Property  is  theft. 

His  ruling  passion  was  Justice.  His  economic  formula  for 
justice  was  "  the  right  to  the  whole  product  of  labour,"  which 


200     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-rn  CENTURY 

could  be  realized  only  by  a  fair  and  free  exchange  of  such 
product.  Private  property,  which  implies  the  levy  of  a  toll 
on  somebody  else's  labour,  is  therefore  a  theft;  but  individual 
possession  is  a  fact  and  cannot  be  abolished.  The  Law,  the 
State  consider  it  their  duty  to  preserve  the  existing  social  order 
based  on  economic  privileges ;  "  authority  "  means  intervention 
for  the  perpetuation  of  injustice,  and  for  that  reason  Proudhon 
calls  himself  an  "  anarchist."  The  constructive  side  is  very 
hazy  in  all  his  writings.  His  ideal  of  free  and  fair  exchange 
would  be  realized  through  co-operation,  "  mutualism."  The 
transformation  from  the  old  to  the  new  could  be  operated,  not 
through  the  suppression,  but  through  the  "  mutualization  "  of 
capital.  In  1848  Proudhon  proposed  to  turn  the  State  into 
a  universal  banker  that  would  give  its  clients  free  credit.  He 
himself  started  a  "  Popular  Mutual  Bank,"  which  for  political 
reasons  was  not  allowed  a  fair  chance.  Like  most  genuine 
Socialists,  he  was  indifferent  to  political  labels,  and  would  gladly 
have  co-operated  with  Napoleon  III:  at  least  he  kept  up  a 
correspondence  with  the  Emperor's  cousin,  Prince  Napoleon. 
His  thought,  obscure  and  contradictory  though  it  often  was, 
influenced  deeply  the  best  minds  among  the  Parisian  working 
men.  In  their  "  mutualism  "  and  their  distrust  of  sheer  politics 
(anarchy),  they  were  his  disciples,  unless  one  prefers  to  say  that 
he  was  their  mouthpiece.  With  the  disintegration  of  Marxism 
and  the  growth  of  a  non-political,  non-communistic,  but  revolu- 
tionary labour  movement,  the  persistence  of  Proudhon's  influence 
has  recently  become  manifest. 

§  3.  FROM  1848  TO  1871. 

Socialism  In  1848 — The  national  workshops — The  Days  of  June — 
The  Red  Fiend — The  Coup  d'etat — Persecutions — Saint-Simonian 
policy  of  Napoleon  III — Hostility  of  the  industrial  workers  to  the 
Empire — Liberal  legislation  after  1860 — Prince  Napoleon  and 
labour — The  working  men  delegates  to  London — Origin  and  develop- 
ment of  the  International  Working  Men's  Association. 
The  Commune. 

Thus  socialism,  in  a  general  sense,  was  rife  about  1848.  Even 
conservative  minds  and  members  of  the  privileged  classes  were 
toying  with  the  idea.  Capitalistic  industry  was  still  young  in 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  201 

France.  Its  enormous  powers  had  not  yet  fully  asserted  them- 
selves, whilst  its  worst  features  were  already  apparent.  It  did 
not  seem  unreasonable,  then,  that  a  reform  of  the  economic 
regime  should  go  hand  in  hand  with  the  radical  transformation 
of  the  methods  of  production.  When  the  throne  of  Louis- 
Philippe  was  swept  away  the  Parisian  populace  insisted  upon 
getting  their  share  of  the  spoils.  And  the  idealistic  democrats 
who  assumed  control  in  February  were  not  systematically  hostile 
to  these  claims.  The  Eepublic  was  to  be  "  democratic  and 
social."  To  the  bourgeois  politicians  of  the  Provisional  Govern- 
ment were  added  Louis  Blanc,  one  of  the  best-known  theorists 
of  socialism,  and  Albert,  a  working  man.  "  The  organization 
of  labour/'  "the  right  to  employment"  (droit  au  travail), 
demanded  by  Arago  and  Louis  Blanc  in  1840,  were  promised, 
albeit  vaguely,  in  official  proclamations.  A  commission,  with 
Louis  Blanc  as  its  chairman,  was  to  meet  at  the  Luxembourg 
Palace  and  investigate  the  social  question  in  all  its  aspects. 
In  order  to  relieve  the  distress  caused  by  the  political  crisis, 
national  workshops  were  created. 

But  it  soon  became  evident  that  Paris  had  far  outrun  the 
rest  of  France.  The  dense  mass  of  petty  shopkeepers,  small 
manufacturers,  independent  artisans,  and  peasant  proprietors, 
whose  small  capital  represented  years  of  toil  and  self-denial, 
saw  nothing  in  socialism  but  the  equal  division  of  property,  and 
shuddered  at  the  thought.  The  rift  between  the  victors  of 
February  soon  became  irremediable.  Lamartine  refused  to 
discard  the  glorious  tricolour  for  the  red  flag  of  socialism.  The 
elections  sent  to  the  Constituent  Assembly  a  majority  of 
Bepublicans  who,  although  well-meaning  and  progressive,  were 
committed  to  the  defence  of  individual  ownership.  The  Lux- 
embourg commission  was  given  no  authority,  and  its  labours 
remained  purely  academic.  The  national  workshops  were  organ- 
ized by  enemies  of  their  first  promoter,  Louis  Blanc.  Useless 
and  costly,  they  grew  like  an  ulcer;  as  many  as  119,000  men 
were  on  the  pay-roll.  They  were  a  "club  of  loafers,  a  reserve 
army  of  insurrection,  a  perpetual  strike  supported  out  of  public 
money."  Their  sudden  suppression  was  the  occasion  of  the 
rising  of  June.  The  real  cause  was  the  desire,  on  the  part  of 


202     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

the  Socialists,  to  resume  the  direction  of  the  Eepublic,  which 
they  felt  slipping  away  from  them.  The  Days  of  June  thoroughly 
roused  the  conservatives  to  a  sense  of  their  danger.  Hence- 
forth the  fear  of  the  "  red  fiend  "  (le  spectre  rouge)  will  be  their 
ruling  passion.  After  the  victory  of  Cavaignac  and  the  ferocious 
repression  which  followed  it,  companies  of  national  guards, 
organized  throughout  France,  poured  into  Paris,  eager  to  defend 
society  against  the  barbarians  from  within.  The  leaders  of 
socialism  could  barely  get  a  hearing  in  the  Assembly.  The 
most  active  propagandists,  if  they  had  escaped  the  bullets  of 
the  "  army  of  order,"  were  imprisoned,  exiled,  or  transported. 

However,  the  ground  won  in  February  was  not  totally  lost  in 
June.  The  Second  Eepublic  encouraged  working  men's  associa- 
tions of  all  kinds,  especially  mutual  help  and  co-operative 
societies.  There  was  an  admirable  development  of  these,  even 
during  the  period  of  dull  reaction  in  1849  and  1850.  This, 
much  more  than  the  sensational  election  of  the  pseudo-socialist 
Eugene  Sue  in  Paris,  showed  the  vitality  of  the  labour  move- 
ment. Unfortunately,  this  auspicious  growth  was  cut  short  by 
the  coup  d'etat  of  December,  1851.  Eager  to  suppress  every 
possible  centre  of  disturbance,  the  government  of  Louis  Napo- 
leon placed  every  kind  of  working  men's  associations  under  the 
ban.  Harmless  co-operative  societies  were  treated  with  sus- 
picion, as  though  they  had  been  revolutionary  clubs.  Their 
managers  and  secretaries  were  arrested,  and  in  many  cases 
kept  in  prison  or  transported  for  no  indictable  offence.  At 
Lyons,  General  de  Castellane  simply  ordered  every  society 
to  be  dissolved.  All  known  Socialists  were  kept  under 
close  police  supervision;  the  proletariat  was  shorn  once  more 
of  its  natural  leaders,  and,  for  ten  years,  "society  knew 
peace." 

We  reiterate  that  Napoleon  III  had  constantly  for  his  aim 
"  the  improvement  of  the  material,  intellectual,  and  moral  con- 
dition of  the  most  numerous  and  poorest  class."  The  immense 
public  works  encouraged  by  him,  and  often  due  to  his  own  far- 
sighted  initiative,  were  meant  to  redeem  the  promises  of  his 
pamphlet  On  the  Extinction  of  Pauperism.  They  were,  in 
fact,  national  workshops,  but  of  a  more  permanent  and  more 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  203 

efficient  kind  than  those  of  1848.  Many  institutions  were 
developed  or  created  which,  directly  or  indirectly,  were  to  benefit 
the  working  classes:  model  tenement  houses,  hospitals,  con- 
valescents' homes,  baths,  State  pawnshops,  popular  loan  associa- 
tions, etc.  Out  of  the  property  confiscated  from  the  Orleans 
family,  10,000,000  francs  were  given  to  social  charities.  No 
other  Government  has  so  consistently  attempted  to  serve 
the  best  interests  of  the  people ;  it  was  indeed  "  Caesarian 
socialism." 

Yet  the  Empire  failed  to  secure  the  support  of  the  working 
men.  All  its  best  efforts  were  marred  by  the  narrow,  compres- 
sive  paternalism  which  made  the  officials  impatient  of  every 
spontaneous  activity.  The  bureaucracy  could  not  brook  inde- 
pendence; the  French  hated  nothing  so  much  as  tutelage. 
Whatever  Xapoleon  offered  them  they  took  without  thanks, 
aware  that  it  was  their  birthright.  Moreover,  the  transformation 
of  industry  was  proceeding  at  such  a  rate  that  the  progressive 
measures  of  the  Government  could  not  keep  pace  with  it.  In 
spite  of  all  efforts,  and  whilst  the  standard  of  life  was  undoubt- 
edly raised,  the  poor  were  getting  proportionately  more  numerous 
and  poorer.  One  after  another  the  avenues  from  the  proletariat 
to  the  capitalistic  class  were  being  closed.  The  scandalous 
luxury  of  trie  cosmopolitan  pleasure-seekers,  even  the  splendour 
of  the  new  Paris  and  the  wonders  of  the  international  exposi- 
tions, had  the  effect  of  embittering  the  labourers. 

Until  1859  the  Empire  was  an  efficient  autocracy;  after  that 
date  the  regime  became  markedly  more  liberal.  Napoleon 
needed  the  support  of  the  advanced  elements  against  the  Catho- 
lics in  his  Italian  policy,  and  he  felt  that  sheer  compression 
was  growing  impossible  in  France.  A  number  of  progressive 
measutes  were  passed.  It  will  be  remembered  that  whilst 
strikes  as  such  were  not  punishable  by  law,  any  concerted  action 
on  the  part  of  the  working  men  was  an  indictable  offence;  this 
anomaly  was  removed  in  1864.  Mutual  help  and  co-operative 
societies  were  not  only  authorized  but  encouraged.  A  central 
"  Bank  of  Credit  to  Labour  "  was  created  in  1863.  Article  1781 
of  the  Civil  Code,  obnoxious  to  wage-earners  as  a  stigma  of 
legal  inferiority,  was  repealed  in  1868. 


204     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

The  Emperor's  first  cousin,  Prince  Napoleon,  was  the  centre 
of  an  active  group  of  Caesarian  democrats  and  Saint-Simonians ; 
Gueroult  was  known  to  be  the  representative  of  that  group  in  the 
Parisian  Press.  A  series  of  popular  tracts,  published  under  the  in- 
spiration of  Prince  Napoleon's  friends,  failed  to  dispel  the  anti- 
Bonapartist  prejudice  of  the  labourers.  But  it  was  through  the 
efforts  of  Gueroult  and  Prince  Napoleon  that  a  certain  number  of 
working  men  were  sent  as  delegates  to  the  Exposition  of  London 
in  1861.  The  liberal  policy  of  the  British  Government  in  times 
of  strikes,  the  power  of  the  trade  unions,  opened  the  eyes  of  the 
French  visitors  to  the  backwardness  of  their  own  land.  More- 
over, it  made  them  realize  of  what  importance  international 
co-operation  would  be  to  the  labour  world. 

In  1863  working  men  of  several  nations  met  again  in  London 
to  consider  the  possibility  of  concerted  action  on  behalf  of 
Poland,  then  rising  against  its  Russian  oppressors.  This  meet- 
ing, although  purely  political,  led  to  the  formation  of  the 
"International  Working  Men's  Association"  in  1864.  The 
International  soon  assumed  in  the  eyes  of  the  public  an  import- 
ance which  was  justified  neither  by  its  membership  nor  by  its 
financial  resources.  Wild  rumours  were  circulated  about  the 
"  millions  "  in  men  and  money  of  that  mysterious  power  which 
threatened  to  engulf  present  society.  The  truth  was  that  the 
International  was  powerless  for  lack  of  funds  and  for  lack  of 
common  principles.  At  first  the  mutualistic  conceptions  of 
Proudhon  prevailed  in  it.  Then,  at  the  Congress  of  Brussels, 
the  collectivists  secured  control  of  the  association.  They  had 
next  to  fight  against  the  anarchists,  led  by  Bakounine,  whom 
the  Marxists  did  not  manage  to  expel  until  1872.  Meanwhile 
the  International,  rigorously  prosecuted  by  the  Imperial  Govern- 
ment in  1867-68,  had  lost  all  vitality  in  France.  Its  apparent 
revival  at  the  close  of  the  Empire  was  due  to  the  unsettled 
condition  of  the  country — agitated  by  political  reform,  violent 
antidynastic  attacks,  numerous  strikes,  and  rumours  of  foreign 
conflict.  The  International  is  a  creditable  but  premature 
attempt,  symptomatic  rather  than  influential. 

The  working  men  had  made  the  mistake  of  striking  an  alliance 
with  the  bourgeoisie  of  the  liberal  opposition.  In  1863  they  had 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  205 

given  up  their  plan  of  having  special  labour  candidates.  In  1864 
Tolain  stood  independently  and  gathered  a  ridiculously  small 
number  of  votes  (424).  In  1869  the  labourers  elected  anti- 
Imperialists  like  Gambetta  and  Rochefort  rather  than  members 
of  their  own  class.  They  believed  that  if  only  the  tyranny  were 
overthrown,  they  would  get  their  own  way.  But  the  Empire 
seemed  to  take  a  new  lease  of  life;  the  plebiscite  of  May,  1870, 
proved  that  France  was  opposed  to  any  thought  of  revolution. 
The  Franco-Prussian  War  changed  the  conditions  of  the  problem. 
The  Empire  fell  as  a  result  of  military  defeat.  Labour  questions 
receded  into  the  background ;  the  immediate  task  was  to  save  the 
country.  Then  the  Commune  broke  out.  We  have  attempted  to 
show  how  this  insurrection  was,  at  first,  pariotic  and  not  socialistic. 
But,  before  its  defeat,  it  had  gradually  assumed  a  strong  tinge  of 
internationalism  and  class  struggle.  The  Versailles  Government 
undoubtedly  considered  it  in  that  light.  Conservative  France  felt 
again  the  shudder  of  June,  1848;  once  more  the  solid  earth  had 
quaked.  Hence  the  ruthlessness  of  the  repression,  which  partook 
of  the  atrocious  character  of  a  class  war  and  a  religous  persecution. 
"  Democracy  was  bled  for  a  generation,"  and  with  democracy 
socialism.  Thus  the  original  mistake  of  labelling  the  Commune 
socialistic  has  become  a  fact  potent  for  evil.  The  tragic  memories 
of  1871  gave  the  struggle  of  the  classes  in  France  a  bitterness 
unknown  in  more  fortunate  lands. 

§  4.  SOCIALISM  UNDER  THE  THIRD  EEPUBLIC. 

Revival  of  socialism — Jules  Guesde  and  Lafargue — Divisions  into 
sects — Millerand  and  Jaures — The  Dreyfus  case :  impetus  it  gave  to 
socialistic  ideas — Millerand  in  Cabinet — Unification  in  1904 — Rup- 
ture with  the  Radicals. 

Social  policy  of  the  Radicals :  mutualism. 

Afte*  the  Commune  there  was  a  lull  in  the  labour  move- 
ment. The  International,  everywhere  looked  upon  with 
suspicion,  rigorously  prohibited  in  France,*  torn  between 
the  Marxists  and  the  Bakouninists,  emigrated  to  America 
and  slipped  quietly  into  oblivion.  Most  of  the  leaders  of  the 
French  proletariat  had  disappeared  in  the  storm  of  1871. 

•  Dufaure  law.  1872. 


206     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

The  struggle  against  monarchical  and  clerical  reaction  absorbed 
the  energy  of  the  rest.  There  was  apparently  a  return  to 
mutualism  and  co-operation,  a  revival  of  the  ideas  of  Proudhon. 
The  working  men's  congress  of  Paris  in  1876  was  strikingly 
moderate. 

But  socialism  was  growing  unperceived.  In  1872  a  French 
translation  of  Marx's  Capital  had  been  published.  Jules  Guesde, 
a  young  fanatic,  keen  and  rigid  like  a  sword,  was  starting  upon 
his  lifelong  apostolate  of  Marxian  orthodoxy.  With  Lafargue, 
another  unswerving,  indefatigable  propagandist,  he  expounded  in 
his  paper,  L'Egalite,  in  innumerable  pamphlets  and  lectures, 
the  pure  collectivist  doctrine.  Condemnations  only  served  to 
spread  his  influence.  Strikes  and  the  agitation  in  favour  of  an 
amnesty  for  the  Communards  favoured  the  growth  of  revolutionary 
sentiment.  The  Government  refused  to  allow  an  International 
Working  Men's  Congress  which  was  to  be  held  in  Paris  in  1878. 
This  illiberal  step  contributed  to  the  success  of  the  radical 
elements  in  the  next  national  convention,  at  Marseilles  in  1879. 
There  the  delegates  of  the  working  classes  formally  endorsed  col- 
lectivism. The  Moderates,  although  outnumbered  at  Marseilles, 
were  still  able  to  defeat  the  Eevolutionists  at  Le  Havre  in  1880 
and  to  drive  them  to  secession.  But  the  Socialist  party  was  born. 

Thenceforward  the  policy  of  the  new  party  has  been  to  steer  a 
middle  course  between  anarchism  and  mere  "  reformism."  On 
the  one  hand,  the  Socialists  severed  all  connection  with  the 
anarchists,  whether  those  of  the  moderate  Proudhonian  type,  or 
those  of  the  revolutionary  brand,  taking  their  inspiration  from 
Bakounine  and  Kropotkine.  On  the  other  hand,  they  guarded 
against  entangling  alliances  with  bourgeois  democrats,  even  of 
the  most  radical  stripe  like  Cle'menceau.  They  are  supposed  to 
take  part  in  election,  and  yet  to  remain  a  foreign,  inassimilable 
element  in  the  political  organism.  It  takes  all  the  impassioned 
dialectics — or  casuistry — of  a  Guesde  to  justify  this  sinuous  course 
between  total  abstention  and  frank  co-operation.  Hence  endless 
debates  and  numerous  divisions. 

Until  1904  the  Socialists  were  split  up  into  many  shifting 
groups.  The  Blanquists,  demagogues  rather  than  Socialists,* 

•  As  was  shown  by  their  participation  in  the  Boulanger  adventure. 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  207 

ever  dreaming  of  a  successful  insurrection,  without  any  clear 
notion  of  what  the  day  after  that  would  bring,  were  a  dwindling 
survival  of  the  Second  Republic  and  the  Commune.  The  Possi- 
bilists  (Broussists),  on  the  contrary,  considering  Marxism  as 
outgrown,  the  last  of  the  Utopian  schemes,  wanted  to  proceed  to 
immediate  reforms  on  the  basis  of  the  existing  State  and  municipal 
services  (1882).  But,  in  1890,  a  certain  number  of  Possibilists 
grew  tired  of  the  cautious  method  of  their  leader,  and  seceded, 
forming  the  Allemanist  group.  Meanwhile,  Guesde  and  his 
friends,  excommunicating  all  heresiarchs,  kept  the  Marxian  faith 
pure  and  undefiled. 

With  all  their  violence  and  narrowness,  these  little  sects 
presented  a  tolerably  united  front  to  the  bourgeois  world,  and 
contrived  to  educate  the  public.  In  1891  and  1893  their  cause 
won  two  brilliant  recruits:  Millerand,  an  able  lawyer,  a  born 
administrator,  firm,  clear-sighted,  moderate ;  Jaures,  a  professor 
of  philosophy,  an  idealist,  an  orator  of  rare  power  and  wonderful 
range  of  adaptability,  and  a  practical  politician  of  no  mean  order. 
At  the  general  elections  of  1893,  fifty  socialists  were  returned,  and 
among  them  Jaures,  Guesde,  Millerand.  They  at  once  started 
in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  one  of  those  grand  academic  debates 
of  which  the  French  are  so  fond.  It  was  a  magnificent  tourna- 
ment of  oratory,  in  which  the  conservative  view  was  ably  defended 
by  Count  de  Mun,  Deschanel,  Aynard,  Rivet.  From  an  obscure 
revolutionary  movement  socialism  had  become  one  of  the  main 
currents  in  French  national  life.  In  1896,  Millerand,  at  Saint- 
Maude,  stated  with  his  usual  clearness  and  authority  the  three 
essential  points  of  evolutionary  socialism :  nationalization  of  all 
means  of  production  and  exchange,  as  soon  as  each  becomes  ripe 
for  such  a  transformation;  conquest  of  public  powers  by  means 
of  universal  suffrage ;  international  understanding  among  working 
people.  This  programme  was  endorsed  even  by  the  Guesdists, 
at  least  as  a  minimum. 

The  Dreyfus  case  was  a  godsend  to  socialism.  This  purely 
individual  affair  developed,  as  we  have  seen,  into  a  general  battle 
for  the  sake  of  justice  and  truth,  and  the  Socialists  happened  to 
be  on  the  right  side.  The  Guesdists,  adhering  strictly  at  first 
to  their  class  prejudice,  took  no  interest  in  this  quarrel  among 


208     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

bourgeois.  But  even  they  could  not  fail  to  see  what  advantage 
it  gave  them  in  their  campaign  against  the  present  regime.  The 
accumulated  mistakes  of  the  "  pillars  of  society  " — Church,  army, 
nobility,  capital — were  so  many  points  scored  by  the  Revolution. 
More  generous  and  wiser  in  the  end  was  the  attitude  of  Jaures. 
The  Dreyfus  case,  he  said,  is  a  question  of  justice.  Socialism,  in 
our  minds,  is  synonymous  with  justice.  Therefore  every  Socialist 
ought  to  consider  the  cause  of  Dreyfus  as  his  own.  Thus,  after 
fifty  years  of  dismal  materialism,  French  socialism  was  brought 
back  into  its  traditional  channel — broad  humanitarianism.  For 
many  Frenchmen  in  1898,  as  in  1848,  socialism  was,  not  an 
economic  theory,  not  a  political  party,  not  a  class  organization, 
but  an  aspiration  and  a  faith.  The  author,  who  has  lived  through 
these  stormy,  unforgotten  days,  can  testify  to  the  extraordinary 
influence  of  Jaures.  Students  and  working  men,  united  as  of  old, 
hailed  him  as  their  prophet.  It  was  then  that  the  rising  genera- 
tion of  teachers  went  over  to  socialism.  Anatole  France, 
the  delicate  epicure  and  sceptic,  de  Pressense,  of  Huguenot 
descent  and  a  contributor  to  the  capitalistic  paper  Le  Temps, 
Emile  Zola  himself  were  carried  by  the  tide. 

Without  the  support  of  the  Socialists  no  Government  favourable 
to  the  cause  of  Dreyfus  could  command  a  majority  in  the  Chamber 
of  Deputies.  So  Waldeck-Rousseau,  a  conservative  Republican, 
but  fearless  and  far-sighted,  struck  an  alliance  with  "  the  enemies 
of  social  order."  He  brought  together  in  his  cabinet  General  de 
Galliffet,  an  aristocratic  soldier  famous  for  his  share  in  the  pitiless 
repression  of  the  Commune,  and  Millerand,  who,  in  his  Saint- 
Mande  speech,  had  stated  the  essentials  of  socialism.  Millerand 
made  a  remarkably  efficient  Minister  of  Commerce  and  Industry. 
Hampered  in  his  legislative  action  by  the  social  conservatism  of 
both  houses,  he  secured  a  number  of  improvements  by  means 
of  decrees,  which  his  successors  did  not  dare  to  repeal.  His 
presence  in  the  strongest  administration  that  France  had  seen 
for  a  generation  made  a  deep  impression  at  home  and  abroad. 
Socialism  had  come  to  stay. 

But  even  the  most  rabid  conservatives  did  not  attack  Millerand 
with  such  bitterness  as  his  fellow  Socialists.  Was  the  theory  of 
class  antagonism  to  be  abandoned?  Was  Marxism  to  join  the 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  209 

Phalanstery  and  Icaria  on  the  scrap-heap  of  outgrown  Utopias? 
Was  the  hope  of  a  sudden  catastrophe,  the  "  red  dawn  "  heralding 
the  millennium,  to  be  laid  aside  as  a  myth?  The  Guesdists 
could  not  hear  the  thought.  The  elements  of  violence  and  envy 
which  a  revolutionary  party  cannot  fail  to  attract  were  dis- 
appointed in  the  cautious,  legal,  temporizing  method  of  the 
parliamentary  Socialists.  In  1900  Jaures  had  managed  to  ward 
off  the  excommunication  which  threatened  Millerand.  In  1904, 
at  the  Amsterdam  congress,  the  participation  of  Socialists  in 
bourgeois  governments  was  formally  condemned.  At  the  same 
time  the  union,  or  rather  the  unification  of  the  French  Socialist 
parties,  was  at  last  realized.  Jaures  remained  within  the  ranks. 
Those  leaders  who  believed  in  parliamentary  methods  were 
excluded.  Few  in  number,  but  exceedingly  able,  the  Indepen- 
dents have  all  held  high  positions :  Millerand  was  twice  again 
Cabinet  Minister,  Briand  twice  'Premier,  Viviani  Minister  of 
Labour,  Augagneur,  a  professor  of  medicine  and  Mayor  of  Lyons, 
was  Minister  and  Governor-General  of  Madagascar.  Cautious 
and  conservative  as  they  have  often  proved  to  be,  these  men  have 
never  abjured  socialism. 

Meanwhile  the  electoral  progress  of  the  party  was  striking. 
In  1906  the  Unified  Socialists,  exclusive  of  the  Independents, 
polled  894,934  votes;  in  1910,  1,107,369.  A  large  fraction  of 
the  Eadical  party,  whilst  remaining  attached  to  the  principle  of 
private  ownership,  was  willing  to  go  very  far  in  the  way  of  State 
socialism,  and  even  tagged  the  word  "  socialist "  to  its  name  (parti 
radical-socialiste).  Thus  a  number  of  social  laws  were  passed: 
the  Millerand-Colliard  law,  in  1900,  limiting  the  day's  work  to 
11  hours;  a  law  on  the  compulsory  assistance  of  the  aged  and 
incurable  (1905)  ;  a  Sunday  rest  law,  bitterly  assailed  by  the 
conservatives,  who  as  a  rule  are  the  chief  supporters  of  the 
Church  (1906)  ;  a  system  of  old  age  pensions  (1906).  As  a  sign 
of  this  increased  interest  in  social  legislation,  a  Department  of 
Labour  was  created  in  1906. 

The  Radicals,  however,  feel  how  weak  their  position  would  be 
if  they  had  no  doctrine  but  reluctant,  mitigated  socialism.  Fure 
"  laissez-faire,"  with  its  brutal  individualism,  has  few  supporters 
left.  Only  a  few  Catholic  employers  and  the  disciples  of  Le 


210     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXrn  CENTURY 

Play  still  adhere  to  the  old  conceptions  of  class  subordination, 
patronage,  and  charity.  Fortunately,  M.  L£on  Bourgeois,  for 
a  long  time  the  nominal  leader  of  the  Radical  party,  rediscovered 
the  doctrine  of  "  solidarity."  *  This  principle  is  now  the  basis 
of  moral  education  in  the  State  schools.  It  forms  a  sane  and 
safe  compromise  between  the  extremes  of  individualism  and 
socialism.  Translated  into  economic  terms,  solidarity  spells 
co-operation  and  mutualism.  Co-operation  has  developed  but 
little,  in  spite  of  the  efforts  of  Professor  Gide:  it  would  affect 
the  interests  of  the  innumerable  retail  dealers  who  are  such  a 
powerful  factor  in  French  politics.  But  mutualism  is  encouraged 
with  almost  ludicrous  solicitude.  There  are  national  celebrations, 
and  special  medals  are  struck,  in  honour  of  mutualism.  Three 
presidents — MM.  Loubet,  Fallieres,  and  Poincare — have  claimed 
the  proud  distinction  of  being  the  first,  second,  and  third 
Mutualists  in  the  Republic.  No  one  would  deny  M.  Deschanel 
the  fourth  place;  and  the  actual  leaders  of  the  movement, 
MM.  Mabilleau  and  Cave,  are  undoubtedly  clever  and 
successful  propagandists.  But,  with  the  exception  of  official 
orators,  no  one  affects  to  believe  that  this  expurgated  edition 
of  Proudhonism  contains  the  secret  of  the  social  sphinx.f 

§  5.  SYNDICALISM,  ETC. 

Syndicalism — Waldeck-Rousseau  law,  1884 — Hostility  of  the  em- 
ployers— Direct  action — The  "  conscious  minority  " — The  general 
strike — Kinship  to  anarchism — Violence. 

Syndicalism  and  the  State  employees. 

The  rural  classes. 

When  the  Socialists  brought  to  an  end  their  alliance  with 
bourgeois  politicians  in  1904,  they  were  not  impelled  by 
a  mere  theoretical  belief  in  class  antagonism,  they  were  in 
danger  of  losing  the  leadership  of  the  labour  world  to  a  new 
and  formidable  rival,  syndicalism.  Whilst  collectivism  had 
grown  respectable  and  harmless,  the  elements  of  uncompromising 

*  The  Interdependence  of  all  human  beings  advocated  forty  years  pre- 
viously by  Pierre  Leroux. 

t  This  la  true  of  other  commendable  expedients,  like  profit-sharing  (Le- 
claire;  FamiHat&re  de  Guiae;  Boucicaut's  Bon  March*.,  etc.). 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  211 

discontent  and  irrepressible  disorder  had  rallied  round  that 
new  flag. 

"  Syndicats "  or  trade  unions  were  strictly  prohibited  from 
1791  to  1864;  under  the  Chapelier  law  no  association  among 
working  men  for  the  discussion  and  defence  of  their  "  alleged 
common  interests "  could  be  formed,  and  the  "  societies  of 
resistance,"  although  fairly  numerous  and  sometimes  successful 
under  Louis-Philippe,  were  of  a  more  or  less  temporary,  secret, 
and  illegal  nature.  When  concerted  action  ("coalition")  was 
permitted  in  1864,  syndicates,  the  necessary  instruments  of  such 
action,  were  not  yet  formally  authorized.  But  the  Imperial 
Government  pledged  itself  to  a  policy  of  toleration,  which  was 
continued  by  the  Republic  until  1884.  It  was  then  that  Waldeck- 
Rousseau,  the  brilliant  young  lieutenant  and  ablest  successor  of 
Gambetta,  gave  the  labour  unions  their  legal  status,  and  in- 
structed his  prefects  to  make  easy  for  them  the  fulfilment  of  all 
required  formalities. 

Waldeck-Rousseau  would  have  liked  to  foster  in  France  the 
development  of  powerful,  highly  organized  unions  of  the  English 
type,  which  he  considered  as  an  element  of  progress  and  stability. 
His  statesmanlike  policy  was  not  understood.  The  employers 
clung  to  the  prejudice  that  every  working  men's  association  was 
a  revolutionary  agency,  bent  upon  depriving  them  of  their 
legitimate  share  of  profit  and  authority.  They  succeeded  in 
frightening  away  from  the  syndicates  all  the  "  good "  men, 
i.e.,  those  of  a  conservative,  respectful,  and  timid  turn  of  mind. 
These  associations  remained,  therefore,  the  rallying-point  of  the 
agitators  and  the  malcontents.  Their  ranks  would  swell  in  times 
of  crisis,  and  be  depleted  when  normal  conditions  prevailed.  In 
short,  labour  unions  have  never  been  fully  acclimatized  in 
France.  The  Government  outwardly  favoured  them.  It  sub- 
sidized labour  exchanges,*  which,  among  other  fields  of  useful- 
ness, were  to  provide  a  home  for  the  syndicates.  At  the  same 
time,  the  old  spirit  of  diffidence  and  secret  hostility  had  not 
vanished.  Whilst  the  State  encouraged  the  labourers  of  priy-ate 
industries  to  form  unions,  it  never  formally  granted  the  same 
right  to  its  own  employees,  just  as  the  kings  of  old  favoured  the 

•  The  one  in  Paris  was  opened  in  1887. 


212     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIX-rH  CENTURY 

communal  movement  everywhere  except  in  their  own  domains. 
Many  unions  refused  to  comply  with  certain  formalities  which 
they  considered  vexatious,  useless,  and  even  dangerous.  M.  Dupuy 
took  advantage  of  the  conflict  to  close  the  Paris  Labour  Exchange 
in  1893.  In  fact,  this  official  home  of  the  syndicates  in  the 
capital  has  repeatedly  been  turned  into  a  sort  of  insurrectional 
fortress  which  the  police  had  to  capture,  not  without  bloodshed.* 
The  labour  unions  were  supposed  to  be  purely  economic 
associations  and  to  stand  aloof  from  politics.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  their  neutrality  never  was  more  than  nominal.  For  a  long 
time  they  were  considered  as  mere  branches  of  the  Socialist 
party.  Socialist  deputies  and  journalists  pleaded  their  cause  in 
Parliament  and  in  the  Press,  Socialist  orators  came  to  encourage 
them  with  fiery  speeches  in  times  of  conflict.  In  1902  the 
General  Confederation  of  Labour,  created  in  1895,  practically 
absorbed  the  earlier  Federation  of  Labour  Exchanges  and  became 
the  leading  factor  in  the  situation.  From  that  time  on  Syndi- 
calism, fully  organized,  has  become  more  and  more  independent 
of  the  Socialist  party.  But  it  retains  the  essentials  of  the 
Socialist  doctrine — the  war  of  the  classes,  the  emancipation  of 
the  wage  earners,  collective  ownership  of  all  instruments  of 
production.  The  difference  between  the  Socialists  and  the 
Syndicalists  is  one  of  method  and  spirit.  The  Socialists  believe 
in  political  action.  The  moderate  elements  among  them  even 
believe  in  parliamentary  methods  and  try  to  secure  immediate 
social  improvements  through  co-operation  with  the  bourgeois 
parties.  The  more  radical  branch  pooh-pooh  such  attempts,  but 
expect  to  carry  out  socialism  in  ioto  as  soon  as  they  have  captured 
the  political  machinery.  In  a  country  like  France,  governed  by 
manhood  suffrage,  their  aim  and  their  method  are  not  essentially 
revolutionary.  The  Syndicalists,  on  the  contrary,  have  no  faith 
in  politics.  They  ignore  the  State,  which  is  merely  an  organiza- 
tion for  the  defence  of  capital.  They  ignore  the  Fatherland,  a 

•  However,  It  must  be  said  that  a  few  syndicates  were  conducted  In  a 
less  violent  and  more  businesslike  method.  The  Federation  of  the  Print- 
ing Trades,  ably  led  by  Keufer,  has  a  fine  record  of  efficient  service.  The 
Miners'  Union,  with  Basly,  and  the  Rallwaymen's  Union,  with  Guftrard, 
secured  favourable  legislation  for  their  respective  industries,  on  account  of 
the  electoral  influence  which  their  numbers  gave  them. 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  213 

delusion  kept  up  by  the  governing  classes  in  order  to  perpetuate 
their  power.  Social  legislation  is  a  snare.  Socialist  politicians 
are  mostly  professional  men,  bourgeois  by  birth,  education,  asso- 
ciation ;  in  a  bourgeois  assembly,  they  lose  touch  with  the  actual 
problems  of  the  working  classes.  Laws  with  high-sounding 
labels,  but  amended  by  the  conservative  Senate,  hemmed  in  by 
restrictive  interpretations  of  the  Minister  and  the  Council  of 
State,  enforced  with  reluctance  or  partisanship  by  the  prefects, 
the  police,  the  courts,  bring  no  relief  to  the  labourers.  The  role 
of  Parliament  is  not  to  initiate  reforms :  the  best  it  can  do  is  to 
register  them  in  the  Statute-book  when  they  have  been  con- 
quered by  direct  action.  The  war  of  the  classes  is  not  political, 
but  economic;  it  should  be  waged  not  in  assemblies,  but  in  the 
streets  or  in  workshops.  Its  chief  instrument  is  the  strike.  Not 
only  can  the  strike  secure  definite  advantages — shorter  hours, 
higher  wages,  recognition  of  the  unions,  etc. — but  it  has  a  high 
educative  value.  For  it  makes  the  antagonism  of  capital  and 
labour  manifest ;  and  it  prepares  men's  minds  for  the  final  con- 
summation— the  revolution  of  folded  arms,  the  general  strike, 
which,  paralysing  the  whole  bourgeois  world,  would  usher  in  the 
new  order.  What  that  new  order  would  be  is  not  perfectly  clear. 
This,  at  least,  is  certain:  mere  geographical  organization  would 
be  subordinated  to  professional  organization,  the  labour  union, 
rather  than  the  city,  would  be  the  social  unit,  the  federation 
of  labour  would  be  more  important  than  the  State;  in  other 
words,  the  "  political  hierarchy  would  be  replaced  by  economic 
federalism." 

Strikes  are  open  war.  But  the  silent  war  of  the  classes  goes 
on  relentlessly,  even  in  times  of  apparent  truce.  So  direct  action 
continues,  even  when  working  men  are  at  their  posts.  They  can 
retaliate  against  employers  hostile  to  organized  labour  by  doing 
systematically  poor  work  ("  sabotage  "),  or  by  taking  as  long  as 
they  possibly  can  to  finish  a  certain  job  ("  fignolage  ").  They 
can  thus  show  their  determination  to  sacrifice  the  interests  of 
their  employers,  whenever  these  interests  are  in  conflict  with 
their  own.  They  can  enforce  their  will  through  street  demon- 
strations and  public  meetings,  by  a  display  of  sheer  number  if 
that  be  sufficient  to  overawe  their  adversaries,  by  open  violence 


214     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXra  CENTURY 

in  case  of  need.  Thus  was  secured  the  closing  of  objectionable 
private  employment  bureaux. 

The  Syndicalists  know  that  "  organized  labour  "  forms  but  a 
small  fraction  of  the  active  population  in  France.  Furthermore, 
within  that  minority,  the  advocates  of  direct  action  and  constant 
warfare  are  themselves  a  minority.  They  have  steadily  refused, 
in  their  congresses,  proportional  representation,  which  might 
place  the  big  and  comparatively  conservative  syndicates  in 
control.  They  were  hostile  to  the  Millerand  bill  for  the  com- 
pulsory arbitration  of  labour  disputes,  which  would  require  all 
working  men  to  vote,  by  secret  ballot,  before  deciding  on  a  strike. 
Their  argument  is  that  democracy,  the  rule  of  mere  numbers,  is 
a  fallacy.  Only  the  few  clear-sighted  and  energetic  men  who  are 
conscious  of  their  rights  and  willing  to  run  risks  are  entitled  to 
leadership.  A  handful  of  adventurous  pioneers  must  blaze  the 
trail  for  the  rest.  The  amorphous  mass  should  follow,  and,  in 
fact,  does  follow.  Such  is  the  law  of  progress.* 

Syndicalism  is  the  direct  offspring  of  anarchism :  Proudhon 
is  the  ancestor  of  the  moderate  .Syndicalists,  Bakounine  and 
Kropotkine  the  intellectual  leaders  of  the  more  radical.  But 
anarchism  has  a  double  aspect:  free  association  as  an  ideal,  and 
the  violent  destruction  of  the  existing  order.  Violence  rather 
than  association  is  the  keynote  of  the  present  movement.  There 
has  undoubtedly  been,  within  the  last  sixty  years,  a  re-barbariza- 
tion  of  Western  Europe  which  the  spread  of  education  has  failed 
to  check.  Bonapartism  and  Bismarckism,  in  some  respects, 
represented  the  insolent  triumph  of  brute  force.  The  repression 
of  the  Commune  has  filled  the  brains  of  the  working  classes  with 
tragic  visions.  Darwinism  was  made  to  mean  "  struggle  for  life 
and  the  survival  of  the  fittest."  Imperialism  and  military 


•  This  philosophy.  In  which  can  be  traced  Nietzschelan  and  Bergsonian 
influences,  has  been  copiously  expounded  by  an  Involved,  paradoxical,  and 
stimulating:  thinker,  Georges  Sorel,  mainly  in  The  Delusions  of  Progress 
and  Reflections  on  Violence.  One  curious  point  of  this  doctrine  is  the 
theory  of  myths.  Men  need  some  hope  of  sudden  and  complete  salvation, 
a  myth  embodying  all  their  aspirations.  The  second  coming  of  Christ  was 
such  a  myth  for  the  early  Church.  The  general  strike  is  the  myth  of 
Syndicalism.  Its  potency  is  not  to  be  measured  by  its  practicability:  It 
is  a  dynamic  or  creative  idea. 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  215 

patriotism  are  doctrines  of  violence.  Nations  have  been  living 
on  the  principle  that  might  is  right.  The  moral  effect  of  these 
influences  can  now  be  seen. 

There  is,  of  course,  in  syndicalism,  as  in  all  gospels  of  war, 
something  superior  to  mere  brutality.  There  is  a  sense  of  the 
value  of  energy  and  individual  responsibility.  Dr.  Gustave  Le 
Bon  and  others  affected  to  believe  that  State  socialism  would  be 
the  refuge  of  worn  out,  effete  races:  syndicalism  preaches  the 
strenuous  life.  There  is  no  flabbiness  about  it. 

It  seems  as  though  the  worst  of  the  first  syndicalist  crisis 
were  over.  In  1906-10  France,  in  the  opinion  of  many 
thoughtful  observers,  was  on  the  verge  of  a  revolution.  The 
1st  of  May,  1906,  was  expected  to  open  the  era  of  conflagration. 
The  postmen's  strike,  the  rebellion  of  the  winegrowers  in  the 
south,  the  general  railroad  strike,  were  signs  of  deep  social 
unrest.  No  radical  change  has  taken  place;  but  there  is  a  lull 
in  the  strife,  due  partly  to  the  revival  of  military  nationalism. 
The  old  machines,  parliamentary  government  and  capitalistic 
industry,  continue  their  course  without  excessive  jerks  or  friction. 
But  the  outlook  is  by  no  means  reassuring. 

The  most  unexpected  development  of  syndicalism  was  its 
success  among  the  State  employees.  They  had  always  been 
considered  as  the  mainstays  of  order,  discipline,  and  the 
hierarchy.  Direct  action  was  the  last  thing  these  "  knights  of 
the  red  tape  "  seemed  capable  of.  They  had  already  what  other 
labourers  strive  in  vain  to  secure:  short  hours,  steady  employ- 
ment, old  age  pensions.  Their  alliance  with  the  revolutionists 
seemed  sheer  madness.  But  they  had  economic  grievances: 
their  wages  had  not  increased  so  fast  as  the  cost  of  living.* 
The  only  method  of  improving  their  condition  was  through 
Parliament ;  but  "  lobbying  "  is  a  slow,  uncertain,  and  above  all 
a  humiliating  method.  The  officials  grew  weary  of  importuning 
deputies  and  senators  for  favours  instead  of  discussing  the  terms 


•The  rate  of  letter  postage  had  been  reduced  from  15  centimes  to  10; 
hence  a  rapid  growth  of  postal  business,  whilst  the  staff  remained  about 
the  same  and  complained  of  overwork.  The  teachers  had  been  expected  to 
devote  their  evenings  to  social  work  (mutual  help  societies,  etc.)  and 
extension  classes  without  any  remuneration. 


216     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

of  a  contract  like  free  men.  They  resented  especially  the 
growing  interference  of  politicians  in  matters  of  appointments 
and  promotions.  The  French  civil  service  had  never  been  run 
on  the  spoils  system :  the  same  functionaries,  appointed  for  life, 
served  all  Ministries,  Governments,  or  even  regimes  with  the 
same  zeal  or  the  same  indifference.  The  bureaucracy  was  until 
recent  years  an  autonomous  power  in  the  State.  Now,  after  the 
Dreyfus  crisis,  the  Radicals  thought  it  was  a  scandal  that  the 
Republic  should  be  served  by  Monarchists  whilst  so  many  good 
Republicans  were  kept  out  in  the  cold;  so  they  set  themselves 
to  the  task  of  "  republicanizing "  the  different  public  services. 
This  policy  had  some  justification;  there  had  been  in  the  past 
instances  of  flagrant  anti-republican  favouritism.  But  the 
abuses  did  not  disappear;  they  merely  changed  sides.  The 
friends  of  Radical  deputies  were  advanced  with  scandalous 
rapidity.  Young  private  secretaries  were  promoted  over  the 
heads  of  tried  and  faithful  specialists.  It  was  against  this 
growing  evil,  this  multitudinous  tyranny,  that  the  officials  rose 
in  their  wrath.  Syndicalism  was  in  fashion;  so  they  formed 
syndicates  and  sought  affiliations  to  the  General  Federation  of 
Labour.  Not  that  they  were  anarchists;  all  they  wanted  was 
that  a  certain  measure  of  democracy  be  introduced  into  the  old 
Napoleonic  hierarchy,  and  guarantees  that  promotion  would  be 
the  reward  of  professional  merit  rather  than  of  political  intrigue. 
A  law  defining  the  status  of  State  employees  has  long  been 
promised  but  is  ever  deferred.  It  would  allow  them  to  form 
associations,  but  not  syndicates.  Some  method  would  be  devised 
for  adjusting  their  difficulties  without  'resorting  to  strikes. 
When  such  a  law  is  passed,  if  it  be  broad  enough,  and  generously 
interpreted,  the  syndicalist  danger  will  disappear.  At  present, 
France  offers  the  paradoxical  situation  of  State  employees  as 
a  body  supporting  the  General  Confederation  of  Labour — an 
organization  openly  at  war  with  the  State.* 


•It  is  probable  that  State  employees  will  be  divided  into  three  cate- 
gories, with  slightly  different  rights:  (1)  Purely  industrial  services, 
arsenals,  ship-building  yards,  gun  foundries,  match  and  tobacco  factories, 
etc.  (2)  Industrial  services  which  cannot  be  interrupted  without  inflicting 
damages  on  the  general  life  of  the  country  (telephonic,  telegraphic,  postal, 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  217 

Sixty  per  cent,  of  the  French  population  live  on  the  land,  and 
landowners  form  more  than  one-half  of  the  rural  classes;  there 
are  3,500,000  peasant  proprietors  (12  to  15,000,000  with  their 
families).  Here  we  have,  therefore,  the  conditions  which  the 
leaders  of  the  "  Back  to  the  Land  "  movement  are  so  eager  to 
restore  in  Great  Britain.  This  is  the  main  result  of  the  Revolu- 
tion,  which  confiscated  and  sold  the  estates  of  the  nobility  and 
clergy.  The  Napoleonic  Code  gave  stability  to  the  new  regime, 
and  through  elaborate  inheritance  laws  prevented  the  reconstitu- 
tion  of  large  domains.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  throughout  the  nine- 
teenth century  there  has  been  no  tendency  towards  concentration ; 
Marxian  prophecies  are  here  absolutely  at  fault. 

The  division  of  property  has  undoubtedly  gone  to  an  extreme 
in  France.  Each  peasant  owns  but  a  few  acres,  which  are 
scattered  in  small  and  irregular  fields  all  over  the  territory  of 
the  parish;  this  is  why  the  French  countryside  offers  such  a 
curious  patchwork.  Thanks  to  the  obstinate  toil  of  the  peasant 
and  to  his  thrifty  habits  he  can  manage  to  subsist  on  his 
diminutive  farm.  He  can  even  hoard  up  a  few  ecus  in  the 
traditional  woollen  stocking,  until  he  gets  a  chance  of  purchasing 
another  patch  of  ground.  This  class  is  said  to  be  the  backbone 
of  France.  No  one  will  deny  their  perseverance  and  frugality. 
Under  this  regime,  the  country  is  practically  self-supporting 
and  almost  free  from  severe  economic  crises;  and  its  faculty  of 
recuperation  after  great  disasters  is  truly  marvellous.  But  one 
may  wonder  whether  the  price  paid  for  these  advantages  was  not 
excessive.  The  scattered  fields  entail  an  enormous  waste  of 
labour ;  modern  methods  require  larger  areas,  more  capital,  more 
education,  a  broader  outlook,  than  the  plodding  French  peasant 
can  possess.  If  he  were  left  unprotected,  he  could  not  compete 
with  the  large  and  up-to-date  producers  of  America.  This  would 
lead  to  a  recasting  of  the  agricultural  system — a  terrible  crisis, 
but  one  which  might  be  followed  by  an  era  of  indefinite  progress. 
Such  a  revolution,  however,  is  not  to  be  expected;  the  peasants 
are  the  controlling  factor  in  the  political  life  of  the  country.  _-On 

and  railroad  services).  (3)  Administrative  officers,  tax-collectors,  and 
other  clerks,  police,  teachers,  etc.  But  the  distinction  is  by  no  means  easy 
to  draw. 


218     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

almost  every  subject  they  follow  the  lead  of  the  cities ;  but  when 
their  immediate  interests  are  at  stake  they  know  how  to  take 
care  of  themselves.  The  one  hope  of  salvation  for  the  country 
lies  in  agricultural  associations.  Whilst  the  peasants  are 
radically  opposed  to  the  collective  ownership  of  land,  they  are 
beginning  to  realize  the  possibilities  of  co-operation.  Their 
syndicates — which  have  nothing  but  the  name  in  common  with 
the  syndicates  of  industrial  workers — will  help  them  to  combine 
the  advantages  of  capital,  expert  advice  and  scientific  manage- 
ment, with  the  incentive  value  and  independence  of  private 
property.* 

France,  on  the  whole,  is  the  country  where  socialistic  ideas 
are  most  openly  professed  and  assume  the  most  radical  forms. 
But  it  is  at  the  same  time  the  land  where  property  is  most 
equally  divided.  To  the  huge  masses  of  peasant  proprietors, 
retail  dealers,  and  independent  artisans  should  be  added  the 
untold  millions  of  small  investors — for  rare  is  the  French  family 
that  has  not  a  savings  hank  account  or  a  few  francs  of  rente. 
The  army  of  social  conservation  is  therefore  overwhelmingly 
strong.  The  drawback  of  this  system  is  mediocrity.  In  spite 
of  all  industry  and  thriftiness,  the  wealth  of  France  is  not 
increasing  so  fast  as  that  of  her  more  daring  rivals.  The  policy 
of  saving  cents  rather  than  earning  dollars  is  bound  to  prove 
disastrous  in  the  long  run.  Money-making  on  the  large  scale 
has  its  redeeming  features;  but  there  is  no  hope  of  salvation 
for  dull  and  mean  materialism,  the  besetting  sin  of  the  petty 
bourgeoisie. 

•  M.  Jules  Meline  is  the  leader  of  the  French  agrarians,  and  during:  his 
term  of  office  (1896-98)  he  served  their  interests  by  every  means  in  his 
power. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

E.  LEVASSEUR.  Hlstolre  des  Classes  Ouvriferes  et  de  1'Industrie  en 
France  de  1789  a  1870.  2  vols.  8vo,  749-912  pp.  Second  edition. 
A.  Rousseau,  Paris.  1903-4. 

Questions  Ouvrieres  et  Industrielles  sous  la  3eme  Rgpublique. 

8vo,  968  pp.  A.  Rousseau,  Paris.  1907.  (Exhaustive,  old- 
fashioned,  but  scrupulously  fair.) 

G.  WEILL.  Histoire  du  Mouvement  Social  en  France  de  1852  &  1910. 
8vo.  631  pp.  Second  edition.  Alcan,  Paris.  1911.  (Remark- 
ably lucid  and  objective.  Good  bibliography.) 

Louis  LEVIXE.  The  Labour  Movement  in  France.  212  pp.  Columbia 
University,  New  York.  1912.  (A  convenient  introduction  to  the 
subject.  Bibliography.) 

JEAN  JAURES  (general  editor).  Histoire  Socialiste.  (Extremely  un- 
equal. Vast  amount  of  new  material.) 

Of  some  literary  interest  are  the  following: — 

L.  RETBAUD.  Jerome  Paturot  a  la  Recherche  de  la  Meilleure  des 
Rgpubliques.  4  vols.  Levy.  1848.  The  same  L.  Reybaud  had 
treated  the  subject  more  seriously  in  his  Etudes  sur  les  Rgforma- 
teurs  ou  Socialistes  Modernes.  2  vols.  Guillaume. 

S.  CHARLETY.  Histoire  du  Saint-Simonisme.  12mu.  Rachette.  1896. 
(More  sympathetic  than  the  study  of  G.  Weill  on  the  same 
subject. ) 

G.  GEFFROT.  L'Enferm6  (Blanqui).  Charpentier,  Paris.  1896.  (In- 
tensely lifelike.) 

The  rural  classes: — 

M.  AUGE-LARIBE.  L'Evolution  de  la  France  Agricole,  Biblioth&que  du 
Mouvement  Social  Contemporain.  18mo.  A.  Colin,  Paris. 


219 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE 

VI.  THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION 

1789  August   4.     (Theoretical)    Suppression  of  Feudalism  and  reform 

of  Guilds. 
November  3.     Abolition  of  Feudal  Regime.     Some  of  the  rights  to 

be  redeemed. 

1791  March  to  June.  Laws  abolishing  Guilds,  and  Chapelier  law  pro- 
hibiting professional  associations  of  any  kind. 

1793  March  18.     Death  penalty  enacted  against  whoever  should  pro- 
pose an  "  agrarian  law"  (for  the  equal  division  of  property). 
July   17.     All   forms  of  feudal   property  abolished   without  com- 
pensation. 

1796-97  Campaign.,  conspiracy  and  execution  of  Caius  Gracchus  Babceuf. 
1804  Civil  Code  (based  on  bourgeois  conception  of  property  and  liberty 

of  contract.     Cf.  Art.  1780-81). 
1825  Death  of  Saint-Simon. 

1831  November,  and  1834,  February.     Lyons  Insurrection. 

1832  Dispersion  of  the  Saint-Simonian  School. 
1834  Society  of  the  Rights  of  Man   (socialistic). 
1837  Death  of  Fourier. 

1837-39  Society  of  the  Seasons  (Barbfis  and  Blanqui). 

1840  Communists'  Federation  founded   in  London.     Cabet's  Icaria. 

1841  Louis  Blanc:  On  the  Organization  of  Labour. 
Proudhon:  What  is  Property  f 

1847  Manifesto  of  the  Communist  party,  Marx  and  Engels. 

1848  February.     Revolution  in  Paris.     Democratic  and  Social  Repub- 

lic.    Luxembourg  Commission  on  Labour  Problem.     Creation 
of  National  Workshops. 

June.     Suppression    of    National    Workshops.     Socialistic    Insur- 
rection.    Leaders  deported  or  shot. 
September  9.     Law  limiting  day's  work  to  twelve  hours. 

1851  December  2.  Coup  d'Etat.  Reaction,  Socialists  deported. 
Societies  dissolved.  Right  of  reunion  curtailed.  Era  of 
great  public  works  and  industrialism. 

1859  Amnesty.     Return  of  many  exiles. 

1861  Working  men's  delegates  sent  to  the  Exposition  of  London. 
Prince  Napoleon  tries  to  form  a  Bonapartist  Labour  party. 

1863  General  Elections.     Manifesto  of  the  Sixty. 

1864  Prohibition  of  "  coalitions  "  repealed. 

The   International  Working  Men's  Association. 

1865  Death  of  Proudhon. 

1867  Publication  of  Marx's  Capital  (translated  into  French,  1872). 

1868  International  Association  ruined  in  France  by  two  public  prose- 

cutions.    Communists  triumph  over  Mutualists  at  the  Brus- 
sels Congress.     Repeal  of  Art.   1781   of  the  Civil  Code,  and 
other  Liberal  measures.     Numerous  strikes,  1867-70. 
1871  March  to  May.     The  Commune. 
220 


THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION  221 

1872  Congress   of   the    International   at   the    Hague.     Marxists    expel 

Bakouninists. 

1877  Jules  Guesde's  first  campaign  on  behalf  of  Marxism. 
1879  Marseilles     Congress.     Socialists     assume     direction    of    Labour 

Movement. 

1884  Waldeck-Rousseau  Law  on  Trade  Unions. 
1887  Paris  Labour  Exchange  open. 
1889  International   Socialist  Congress,   Paris. 
1892-94  Anarchistic  outrages.     Repressive  measures. 

1892  Law  limiting  day's  work  to  eleven  hours  for  women  and  children. 
Federation  of  Labour  Exchanges. 

1893  Paris  Labour  Exchange  closed  by  Government. 

1895  General  Confederation  of  Labour  created. 

1896  Millerand's  Speech  at  Saint-Mandg,  defining  Political  Socialism. 
1898  Employers'  Liability  Act. 

1898-99  Dreyfus  Crisis.     Millerand  Minister  of  Commerce  and  Industry  in 
"Waldeck-Rousseau    Cabinet.     Numerous    Socialistic    decrees 
(1899-1902). 
1899-1900  Numerous  strikes. 

1900  March  30.  Millerand-Colliard  Law,  limiting  day's  work  to  eleven 
hours  for  men  employed  in  the  same  shops  as  women  and 
children. 

International   Socialist   Congress   in  Paris. 

1902  General  Confederation  of  Labour  absorbs  Federation  of  Labour 
Exchanges. 

1904  Amsterdam    Congress.     Participation    of    Socialists    in    bourgeois 

governments    condemned.     Unification    of    French    Socialist 
party. 

1905  July   14.     Law  on  the  Compulsory  Assistance  of  the  Aged   and 

Incurable. 

1906  May    6.     General    Elections.     Unified    Socialists,    894,934    (exclu- 

sive of  Independent  Socialists). 

July  6.     Law  on  the  Weekly  Day  of  Rest. 

October  25.     Creation  of  Department  of  Labour  and  Social  Wel- 
fare (Viviani). 

1909  March  to  May.     Two  postal  strikes. 

1910  Briand,   Millerand,  Viviani — three  Socialists  in  Cabinet. 
April  5.     Old  Age  Pension  Act. 

General  Elections.     Unified  Socialist  party,  1,107,369  votes. 
October.     Railroad  Strikes.     Briand  calls  out  the  reserves. 


CHAPTER   VII 
EDUCATION 

§  1.  REVOLUTION  AND  EMPIRE. 

Relation  of  educational  problem  to  religion  and  politics — Education 
on  the  eve  of  the  Revolution — Ruin  of  the  old  system — Abortive 
plans — The  Central  Schools. 

Napoleon:     Elementary     education     ignored — The     Lycees — The 
Facultes — The  University:  its  nature  and  purpose. 

THE  problems  of  French  education  cannot  be  understood  except 
in  the  light  of  political  and  religious  history.  This  is  the 
inevitable  result  of  the  rift  in  the  country's  tradition.  Educa- 
tion is  meant  to  spread  knowledge  and  to  fit  men  for  life:  but 
to  discern  true  from  false  knowledge,  to  tell  rightly  what  kind 
of  individual  and  social  life  is  worth  living  implies  a  criterion, 
a  philosophy,  a  faith.  In  America  there  are  innumerable  eddies 
in  the  broad  stream  of  national  consciousness:  there  is  but  one 
main  current.  Christianity  and  eighteenth-century  rationalism, 
individualism,  and  democracy  have  been  harmonized,  or  at  least 
blended,  for  over  a  hundred  years ;  hence  a  comparatively  simple 
conception  of  what  education  should  be.  The  guide  knows 
whither  he  is  leading:  the  road  and  the  pace  alone  are  in 
question.  In  other  terms,  the  principles  of  education  are 
beyond  dispute,  the  problem  is  mainly  one  of  pedagogy.  All 
over  Europe,  on  the  contrary,  and  particularly  in  France,  con- 
flicting faiths  clash  furiously — conservatism  against  radicalism, 
Christianity  against  freethought.  The  school  is  a  strategic 
position  as  keenly  fought  for  as  Parliament  itself. 

Before  1789  education  was  entirely  under  the  control  of  the 
clergy.     The  State  had  direct  authority  only  over  few  special 

222 


EDUCATION  228 

institutions,  such  as  the  Royal  College  (College  de  France).  In 
villages  the  parish  priest  taught  a  few  promising  lads;  in  the 
cities  the  elementary  and  secondary  schools  were  mostly  in  the 
hands  of  friars.  Girls  were  brought  up  in  convents.  The  Jesuits 
had  been  particularly  successful  in  the  education  of  the  upper 
bourgeoisie  and  the  aristocracy.  Rich  families  had  ecclesiastical 
preceptors.  Latin  and  mathematics  were  the  essential  parts  of 
the  curriculum.  The  twenty-two  old  universities  were  moribund. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  upper  classes  of  that  time  were 
intellectually  bold,  alert,  logical,  tolerably  well  informed,  and 
cultured  in  the  broadest  sense  of  the  term.  Through  a  large 
number  of  scholarships  and  charitable  institutions  the  sons  of 
the  people  had  access  to  a  liberal  schooling.  Minor  cities  took 
pride  in  their  learned  bodies,  their  "  academies."  Education 
on  the  eve  of  the  Revolution  was,  it  may  be  granted,  obsolete, 
lopsided,  chaotic  in  the  extreme;  but  it  was  not  so  inefficient 
as  modern  democrats  would  have  us  believe.  If  it  had  been, 
tbe  universal  diffusion  of  philosophical  ideas  revealed  in  the 
Cahiers  of  1789  would  be  inconceivable.* 

The  Revolution  ruined  this  ancient  order:  the  universities 
ceased  to  exist,  the  colleges  lost  their  income,  the  convents 
were  dispersed,  the  priests  were  banished  or  under  constant 
suspicion.  The  new  regime  had  a  lofty  conception  of  national 
education.  Plan  after  plan  was  proposed  and  discussed  at 
length,  but  the  results  were  disappointing.  The  first  reason 
is  that  some  of  the  schemes,  like  those  of  Condorcet  and  Lepe- 
letier  de  Saint-Fargeau,  were  grandiose  but  impracticable.  Even 
the  more  modest  required  vast  resources  which  were  not 
forthcoming  at  a  time  of  civil  and  foreign  war.  The  local 
authorities  were  as  poor  and  powerless  as  the  central  adminis- 
tration. There  was  a  dearth  of  competent  teachers :  the  clerics 
were  not  available,  the  laymen  of  some  culture  had  more  bril- 
liant careers  open  to  them.  Thus  illiteracy  increased,  and  the 
generation  which  grew  to  manhood  in  the  last  decade  of  the 
eighteenth  century  was  undoubtedly  more  ignorant  and  probably 
less  intelligent  than  its  predecessors. 

•  Cahiers :  the  lists  of  grievances  and  proposed  reforms  drawn  by  the 
primary  assemblies  before  the  elections  to  the  States  General. 


224     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXra  CENTURY 

In  secondary  education  the  humanities,  in  spite  of  the  craze 
for  classical  antiquity,  suffered  most  heavily.  The  central 
schools,  which  after  1795  took  the  place  of  the  old  colleges, 
offered  a  system  of  elective  courses:  the  great  majority  of 
students  took  science  and  drawing,  whilst  history,  legislation, 
and  "  general  grammar  "  were  neglected.  The  immediate  prac- 
tical value  of  the  sciences  was  realized  by  the  State  as  well  as 
by  private  citizens;  if  Lavoisier's  services  to  chemistry  failed 
tc  save  his  life,  other  scientists  enjoyed  the  enlightened  protec- 
tion of  the  Government.  The  most  interesting  creations  of  the 
Convention — the  Polytechnic  School,  the  Bureau  des  Longitudes, 
the  reorganized  Museum  of  Natural  History,  or  the  Conservatory 
of  Arts  and  Crafts — were  scientific,  and  more  especially  technical 
institutions.  On  the  other  hand,  the  famous  French  Academy 
lost  its  prestige  with  its  identity,  and  survived  as  a  mere 
section  of  the  new  Institute  of  France.  The  alleged  antagonism 
between  democracy  and  disinterested  culture  was  already 
apparent. 

No  attempt  was  made  to  provide  an  equivalent  for  the  old 
universities.  There  were  only  two  law  schools  and  three 
medical  schools  left  for  the  whole  of  France.  Even  these  were 
not  well  attended:  for  whoever  cared  to  set  himself  up  as  a 
lawyer  or  a  physician  could  do  so  without  a  degree.  There  soon 
was  a  scarcity  of  trained  and  skilful  practitioners. 

Enormous  was  the  task  awaiting  the  First  Consul  in  this  as 
in  all  other  fields.  Unfortunately  he  was  totally  unprepared  for 
this  side  of  it.  He  was  a  born  administrator;  in  legislation  he 
saw  with  great  clearness  a  few  essential  points;  but  he  was  no 
educator,  and  his  suggestions  were  often  chaotic  and  imprac- 
ticable to  a  surprising  degree.*  His  advisers,  Chaptal  and  Four- 
croy,  were  great  chemists,  but  their  minds  lacked  philosophic 
breadth.  Something  was  achieved,  of  course.  With  the  return 
of  normal  conditions  education  was  bound  to  progress.  But  the 
intellectual  development  of  France  was  handicapped  rather  than 
promoted  by  the  creations  of  Napoleon. 

Elementary  education  was  simply  ignored.  A  paltry  subsidy 
of  4,250  francs  to  the  Catholic  schools  was  all  the  contribution 

*  Liard,  L'Enaeignement  BupMttw,  etc.,  II,  22-3. 


EDUCATION  225 

of  the  State  to  that  essential  service.  Teachers  were  instructed 
not  to  go  beyond  the  three  R's  and  the  Catechism,  wherein 
"  our  duties  towards  our  Sovereign  Napoleon  the  Great "  were 
properly  emphasized.  Prefects  were  at  liberty  to  create  normal 
schools  in  their  departments,  but  only  one,  Lezay-Marnesia,  in 
the  lower  Ehine,  availed  himself  of  the  permission. 

In  secondary  education  the  central  schools  disappeared.  .Some 
of  them  had  met  with  indifferent  success :  little  wonder  during  a 
period  of  upheaval  and  regeneration !  but  many  were  flourishing. 
Experience  had  revealed  many  imperfections:  they  did  not 
properly  articulate  with  any  other  grade ;  they  were  "  suspended 
in  mid-air " ;  their  system  of  electives  was  detrimental  to 
literary  culture.  But,  compared  with  the  colleges  of  the  ancient 
regime,  they  were  remarkably  practical,  democratic,  open  to 
modern  ideas.  Their  courses  on  "  the  history  of  free  nations  " 
and  comparative  legislation — the  first  to  be  suppressed  by  Bona- 
parte— could  have  provided  an  adequate  preparation  for  citizen- 
ship in  a  modern  State.  Experts  agreed  that  a  reform  was 
needed:  hardly  any  one  advocated  a  return  to  the  pre-Revolu- 
tionary  methods.  Yet  the  lycees  were  hardly  anything  but  the 
old  colleges,  with  their  interminable  Latin  course,  their  emphasis 
on  rhetoric  and  formal  logic,  their  neglect  of  history  and  natural 
science,  their  monastic  discipline.  The  central  school  student 
enjoyed  excessive  freedom  in  the  selection  of  his  courses:  now 
uniformity  prevailed,  enforced  throughout  the  Empire  by  a 
centralized  bureaucracy.  The  boarding  system,  too,  was  restored 
in  all  its  rigour.  For  eight  or  nine  years,  and  for  ten  months 
in  the  year,  boys  were  to  see  little  or  nothing  of  their  families. 
Every  one  of  their  movements  would  be  regulated  by  the  rolling 
of  drums.  They  had  to  wear  a  military  uniform.  Their  head- 
masters resided  in  the  schools  and  were  celibates  like  the  monks 
of  old.  The  lycee  was  a  combination  of  the  cloister  and  the 
barracks.  Its  aim  was  to  drill  obedient  subjects:  individuality 
was  constantly  repressed. 

The  lyce"es  were  supposed  to  provide  all  the  general  culture 
needed  for  life.  Consequently,  superior  education  was  entrusted, 
not  to  universities,  but  to  technical  schools,  in  which  disinterested 
science  had  no  place.  The  professions  were  no  longer  free  of 


226     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

access  as  under  the  Revolution:  a  degree  was  necessary  to 
qualify  as  a  physician  or  a  lawyer.  The  granting  of  this  degree, 
which  created  a  privilege  for  its  holder  and  constituted  a 
guarantee  for  the  State,  thus  became  the  chief  end  of  superior 
education.  A  rigid  system  of  examinations  was  established,  so 
that  the  degrees  of  the  new  facultes  might  not  become  a  farce 
like  those  of  the  old  universities.  There  was  a  gain  in  effi- 
ciency. But  formalism  and  cramming  always  go  with  the 
examination  method,  and  they  still  prevail.* 

No  less  than  twenty-seven  facultes  of  Letters  and  as 
many  facultes  of  Sciences  were  planned.  This  very  abundance 
should  warn  us  that  they  were  but  in  name  similar  to  the  pro- 
fessional schools  of  law,  medicine,  and  divinity.  They  were 
at  best  a  sort  of  undergraduate  department.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  most  of  them  had  a  purely  nominal  existence ;  they  had  no 
teaching  staff  and  no  buildings  of  their  own,  but  borrowed  both 
from  the  lycees.  With  the  advancement  of  learning  they  had 
little  to  do.  Their  role  was  threefold.  In  a  sense  they  were 
professional;  they  prepared  teachers  for  secondary  education. 
Essentially  they  were  examining  bodies,  stamping  with  official 
approval  the  products  of  the  Iyc6es  and  guarding  the  entrance 
to  the  professions.  Accessorily,  they  were  institutes  or 
athenaeums,  centres  for  popular  lectures  opened  to  the  general 
public.  These  characters  they  have  retained  throughout  the 
nineteenth  century  and  are  but  slowly  losing  at  present.  Uni- 
versity professors  still  waste  much  time  examining  high-school 
students,  and  the  old-fashioned  literary  course,  full  of  wit, 
eloquence,  and  allusions,  is  still  occasionally  given  for  the  benefit 
of  fashionable  ladies  and  retired  magistrates. 

In  France,  therefore,  there  were  no  genuine  universities, 
since  the  different  facultes  of  the  same  region  did  not  form 
a  group,  but  were  absolutely  unrelated  and  often  located  in 


•  In  addition  to  three  medical  schools  and  nine  law  schools,  Napoleon 
organized  two  schools  of  Protestant  and  nine  schools  of  Catholic  theologry. 
This  was  the  consequence  of  the  official  association  between  the  State  and 
the  Churches.  The  Catholic  schools  were  always  viewed  with  suspicion  by 
Rome:  they  disappeared  in  1885  unregretted.  The  Protestant  schools  be- 
came independent  of  State  control  in  1905. 


EDUCATION  227 

different  towns;  and  there  was  no  Philosophische  Fakultat 
worthy  of  the  name,  nothing  even  that  we  might  call  a  College 
of  Liberal  Arts.  The  results  of  these  deficiencies  were  disastrous 
enough;  they  would  have  been  much  worse  but  for  the  exist- 
ence in  Paris  of  a  certain  number  of  institutions  which  partly 
supplied  the  need.  First  of  all,  two  relics  of  the  ancient 
regime,  the  Eoyal  College  and  the  King's  Garden,  reorganized 
by  the  Convention  as  the  College  de  France  and  the  Museum 
of  Natural  History.  The  College,  founded  by  Francis  I  to 
promote  the  study  of  classical  languages,  is  an  admirable 
centre  of  disinterested  investigation,  preparing  to  no  career, 
requiring  and  granting  no  degrees.  The  Museum,  annexed 
to  a  zoological  and  botanical  garden,  is  also  an  organization 
for  teaching  and  research;  it  is  unequalled  for  the  number  of 
famous  scientists  on  its  roll.  The  Normal  School  and  the 
Polytechnic  School  were  created  by  the  Convention,  but  did 
not  assume  their  final  form  until  later.  In  the  Normal  School, 
the  severe  selection  of  a  competitive  entrance  examination, 
and  the  small  number  of  students,  all  boarders,  have  created 
an  atmosphere  and  a  tradition  of  no  small  importance  in  the 
history  of  French  literature  and  science.  The  Polytechnicians 
are  also  a  picked  body  of  young  men;  more  numerous  than 
the  Normalians  and  subjected  to  strict  military  discipline, 
they  show  less  individuality,  a  more  rigid  esprit  de  corps.  The 
curriculum  is  so  encyclopedic,  the  studies  so  thorough,  that 
the  school  has  turned  out  not  only  artillery  officers  and  govern- 
ment engineers,  but  scientists,  philosophers,  and  even  poets. 
These  and  other  survivals  or  creations  such  as  the  Paris 
Observatory,  the  Bureau  of  Longitudes,  and  the  School  of 
Modern  Oriental  languages,  counteracted  the  sterilizing  influence 
of  Napoleon's  system. 

This  system  was  completed  by  the  creation  of  the  Imperial 
University,  decided  upon  in  1806,  but  not  effected  until  two 
years  later.  The  general  problem  was  to  reconstitute  the  unity 
of  the  nation,  to  reconcile  the  old  France  and  the  new.  The 
Concordat  and  the  University  were  means  to  that  end.  The 
University  was  to  include  every  form  and  degree  of  public 
education  throughout  the  land.  No  one  could  open  a  school 


228     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

or  become  a  teacher  without  entering  its  ranks  and  conform- 
ing to  its  regulations.  The  University  represents  the  omni- 
potent State  in  its  educational  capacity.  In  Napoleon's 
intention,  it  was  to  remain  to  a  certain  extent  independent 
of  the  State.  Liberty  of  education  was  contrary  to  Napoleon's 
principles:  to  him  it  meant  anarchy;  a  monopoly  directly 
exercised  by  the  secular  power  would  have  been  intolerable 
to  the  Catholics,  whose  support  was  essential  to  his  plans; 
give  over  education  to  the  Church  he  would  not  and  could 
not,  for  it  was  impossible  to  undo  so  openly  the  work  of  the 
Revolution,  and  besides  he  was  jealous  of  his  own  preroga- 
tives. So  he  devised  this  intermediate  organ,  this  curious 
entity,  this  separate  corporation,  endowed,  privileged,  and  yet 
non-political.  Laymen  and  priests  were  to  find  place  in  it, 
under  the  authority  of  a  Grand  Master  appointed  by  the 
Emperor.  He  hoped  to  make  it  a  real  "  Order,"  submitted 
to  rules  of  celibacy  and  life  in  common;  the  very  name 
Grand  Master  pointed  in  that  direction.  He  hoped  especially 
that  this  "Order"  would  hold,  preserve,  and  teach  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  regime  created  by  him,  and  bring  up  the  new 
generation  in  the  reverence  of  his  dynasty.  He  tried  to 
manufacture  a  tradition  in  a  decade.  The  undertaking  was 
grandiose  and  not  wholly  selfish:  for  Napoleon  considered 
his  power,  his  interests,  as  identical  with  those  of  the  new 
France.  But  it  was  doomed  to  failure;  the  new  regime  had 
no  principles  of  its  own  broad  enough  to  be  acceptable  to  all 
Frenchmen,  and  definite  enough  to  provide  a  firm  basis  for 
national  education.  The  apparent  unity  secured  by  the 
University  was  the  result  of  compromise  and  compulsion:  it 
was  conformity,  not  harmony.  Like  the  Concordat,  the 
University  was  a  constant  cause  of  discord.  But  it  did  not 
endure  so  long.  Barely  forty  years  after  its  inception  it  was 
a  thing  of  the  past  (1850).  To-day  hardly  anything  remains  of 
the  Napoleonic  conception,  except  its  administrative  framework.* 

•The  University  of  France  was  then  divided  into  educational  districts 
or  "academies"  (there  are  sixteen  at  present).  The  rectors  of  these 
academies  are  the  equivalent  of  State  Superintendents  or  Commissioners 
of  Education,  at  the  same  time  as  university  presidents. 


EDUCATION 


§  2.  CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY. 

The  Restoration — The  University  preserved — The  clerical  question — 
The  Sorbonne  trio — Elementary  education;  mutual  and  simultane- 
ous systems — The  July  monarchy — Heyday  of  the  University — The 
College  de  France  trio — Attacks  of  the  Catholics  against  the 
monopoly — Gulzot  law  on  elementary  education. 

The  University  was  so  entirely  Napoleon's  work  that  it 
was  not  expected  to  survive  his  downfall.  In  1814-15, 
Royer-Collard  and  Guizot  were  commissioned  to  draw  up  an 
ordinance  which  created  seventeen  regional  universities,  thereby 
destroying  the  single,  centralized  organization  of  the  Empire. 
The  return  from  Elba  caused  this  plan  to  be  set  aside. 
With  the  Second  Restoration,  the  attack  on  the  University 
was  renewed  with  great  ardour.  The  Catholics,  the  Ultra- 
Royalists,  denounced  it  as  a  centre  of  "  Jacobinism."  But 
more  pressing  problems  called  the  attention  of  the  Govern- 
ment and  the  University  was  "  provisionally "  maintained.* 
For  the  Grand  Master  and  the  Superior  Council  were  sub- 
stituted a  Committee  of  Five,  in  which  Royer-Collard  and 
Cuvier  played  the  leading  parts.  After  six  years  of  this 
temporary  regime,  the  constitution  and  privileges  of  the 
University  were  purely  and  simply  confirmed,  and  the  position 
of  Grand  Master  revived  (February  27,  1821).  Once  more 
it  was  apparent  that  Louis  XVIII  was  the  successor  of 
Napoleon  I  and  not  of  Louis  XVI.  The  centralized  institu- 
tions of  the  Empire  were  so  convenient,  they  represented  so 
clearly  the  ideal  which  the  old  French  kings  were  slowly 
attempting  to  realize,  that  the  restored  monarchy  could  not 
afford  to  discard  them.  Thus  the  prefectoral  administration 
was  preserved,  in  spite  of  a  strong  sentiment  in  favour  of 
provincial  franchises;  thus  it  was  not  found  possible  to  dis- 
pense with  the  Concordat;  thus  the  University  was  saved. 
This  does  not  mean  that  the  genius  of  Napoleon  had  created 
the  indispensable  framework  of  modern  France:  it  means  that 
his  autocracy  had  spoiled  his  successors,  who,  naturally 

•  A  few  facultgs  of  sciences  and  seventeen  facultes  of  letters  were 
suppressed. 


'230     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

enough,  were  reluctant  to  give  up  any  of  the  prerogatives  he 
had  enjoyed:  self-denial  is  even  less  to  be  expected  of 
a  government  than  of  individuals. 

The  University  was  retained  as  instrumentum  regni.  It 
would  have  to  bring  up  the  new  generation  in  the  love  of 
legitimate  monarchy  and  the  Catholic  Church.  Every  effort 
was  bent  in  that  direction.  Cousin,  Guizot,  whose  teaching 
seemed  too  liberal,  were  dismissed.  The  Normal  School  had 
already  been  suppressed  for  the  same  reason.  The  Grand 
Master  was  a  priest,  Mgr.  de  Frayssinous.  In  1824,  when 
the  Ministry  of  Public  Education  became  a  Cabinet  position, 
it  was  significantly  linked  with  the  Department  of  Ecclesias- 
tical Affairs.  The  bishops  were  empowered  to  visit  all  the 
schools  in  their  dioceses.  They  were  at  the  head  of  the  com- 
mittees for  the  appointment  of  teachers.  Yet  the  Church 
was  not  satisfied  with  such  tremendous  influence:  what  she 
wanted  was  direct  control.  The  University  stood  in  the  way; 
although  permeated  by  the  clergy,  it  was  in  principle  a  lay 
institution.  .So  the  Catholics  did  not  disarm,  and  Lamennais, 
at  that  time  a  thoroughgoing  Ultramontane,  accused  the 
State  schools  of  teaching  "  practical  atheism  and  the  hatred 
of  Christianity."  It  is  interesting  to  note  that,  nearly  a 
century  ago,  the  Bourbon  monarchy  was  attacked  exactly  in 
the  same  terms  as  the  Republic  of  Jules  Ferry,  Paul  Bert, 
and  fimile  Combes.  It  proves  that  nothing  short  of  absolute 
domination  will  satisfy  the  Church.  Unable  to  secure  that, 
she  attempted  to  break  down  the  monopoly  enjoyed  by  the 
State.  The  preparatory  seminaries,  since  1814,  were  no 
longer  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  University;  they  were 
gradually  turned  into  ordinary  high  schools,  and  enrolled 
more  students  than  the  official  Iyc6es  and  colleges.*  The 
Jesuits,  under  the  name  of  Fathers  of  the  Faith,  were  developing 
their  institutions.  The  plan  of  attack  was  well  concerted. 

But  the  reactionary  De  Villele  administration  was  driven 
from  office.  The  Liberals  came  in  with  De  Martignac,  and 
the  "encroachments  of  clericalism"  were  checked.  As  a 

•  In  1828,  50.000  against  36.000  in  the  public  high  schools  and  28,000 
in  the  private  high  schools  under  University  supervision. 


EDUCATION  231 

measure  of  protection  against  the  Jesuits,  all  teachers  were 
required  to  sign  a  declaration  that  they  did  not  belong  to  a 
religious  order  not  legally  authorized  in  France.  The  pre- 
paratory seminaries  were  reduced  to  their  proper  sphere,  the 
education  of  future  candidates  for  the  priesthood,  and  the 
maximum  number  of  their  students  was  fixed  at  20,000 
(June  16,  1829).  Cousin  and  Guizot  were  reinstated  in  their 
University  positions.  They  and  Villemain  attracted  crowds 
to  the  old  Sorbonne.  Cousin,  a  genuine  philosopher  with  a 
dash  of  the  mountebank — -Plato-Scapin,  as  Sainte-Beuve  called 
him — denounced  materialism  and  preached  with  admirable 
eloquence  his  eclectic  idealism — Plato,  Kant,  Hegel  com- 
pounded to  suit  the  taste  of  the  Liberal  bourgeoisie.  At  that 
time,  Cousin  believed  that  philosophy  transcended  religion, 
that  it  was  religion  purified  from  popular  prejudices;  and  he 
came  dangerously  near  what  the  orthodox  are  pleased  to  call 
the  "  abyss  of  pantheism."  Guizot  expounded  with  lofty 
gravity  the  philosophy  of  French  civilization.  The  ultimate 
triumph  of  safe  and  sane  liberalism,  as  represented  by  the 
middle  class,  was  the  underlying  principle  of  all  his  courses. 
Villemain  was  not  a  man  of  the  same  calibre.  Yet  he  lec- 
tured with  brilliant  success  on  the  literature  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  rightly  insisting  on  the  comparative  study  of  French 
and  foreign  authors.  These  three  professors,  Mignet  aptly 
said,  had  France  for  their  audience.  A  time  when  the 
triumphs  of  educators  eclipsed  those  of  opera  singers  is  not 
to  be  despised.  Yet  it  may  be  said  that  the  influence  on 
the  development  of  French  education  was  not  wholly  good. 
Admirable  work  was  done  at  the  Sorbonne,  the  College  de 
France,  the  Museum,  by  men  like  Cauchy,  Leclerc,  Biot, 
Ampere,  Thenard,  Daunou,  Quatremere  de  Quincy,  Silvestre 
de  Saci,  Abel  Remusat,  Boissonade,  J.  L.  Burnouf,  Gay- 
Lussac,  Geoffroy  Saint-Hilaire,  Cuvier.  Cousin,  Guizot,  Ville- 
main themselves  were  scholars  as  well  as  orators.  Cousin, 
flashy  though  he  was,  did  excellent  service  in  editing  important 
texts,*  and  he  actually  created  in  France  the  historical  study 
of  philosophy.  Guizot  was  an  indefatigable  and  conscientious 

*  Proclus  in  six  volumes,  Pascal,  etc. 


232     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

investigator,  and  it  was  under  his  direction  that  in  after 
years  the  great  collection  of  documents  relative  to  French 
history  was  commenced.  But  it  was  not  these  substantial 
achievements  that  their  disciples  and  rivals  admired  or  envied; 
it  was  the  exhilaration  of  swaying  an  assembly  in  which  the 
aristocracies  of  birth,  beauty,  wealth,  intellect  and  political 
power  were  represented.  The  great  trio  of  1829  are  partly 
responsible  for  Bellac — for  the  many  elegant,  witty,  and 
shallow  courses  which  have  so  long  been  the  bane  of  French 
universities.* 

For  primary  education  the  Bourbon  monarchy  showed  no 
more  generosity  than  the  Empire.  It  was  left  entirely  to  the 
Church,  to  the  local  authorities,  and  to  private  initiative. 
Thousands  of  villages  had  no  school  whatever.  In  many  others, 
"  teaching "  fell  to  the  lot  of  some  person  otherwise  unemploy- 
able— pauper,  cripple,  Napoleonic  veteran.  Oftentimes  the 
school  was  annexed  to  some  shop — the  wine-shop  not  ex- 
cluded. When  the  master  himself  was  illiterate,  as  it 
occasionally  happened,  his  duties  were  perforce  limited  to  the 
herding  of  the  village  ragamuffins  whilst  their  parents  were 
at  work.  In  the  cities,  however,  some  progress  was  made. 
The  "  mutual "  or  "  monitorial "  system,  applied  with  success 
in  England  by  Bell  and  Lancaster,  was  then  introduced.  The 
Society  for  Promoting  Elementary  Education  founded  a  number 
of  schools,  for  adults  as  well  as  for  children.  But  political 
and  religious  difficulties  were  grafted  on  the  pedagogical  prob- 
lem. The  mutual  system  was  admirably  adapted  to  a  country 
where  everything  had  to  be  done,  and  done  with  limited 
resources.  On  the  other  hand,  according  to  the  conservatives, 
it  ruined  discipline  and  transformed  the  school  house  into 
a  congeries  of  unruly  republics.  In  the  institutions  of  the 
Brothers  of  the  Christian  Doctrine,  the  master  did  not  commit 
to  any  of  his  pupils  a  particle  of  his  authority:  the  proper 
habits  of  order  and  subordination  were  thus  instilled.  So 
the  mutual  schools  were  favoured  by  the  liberals  whilst 

•  The  revived  Interest  in  mediaeval  history,  due  to  romanticism  and 
political  reaction,  resulted  in  the  creation  of  the  School  of  Charters,  1821. 
for  the  training  of  librarians,  record-keepers,  and  paleographers. 


EDUCATION  233 

"simultaneous  instruction"  remained  the  rule  with  the 
religious  orders.  Neither  method  was  practised  or  practicable 
in  the  smaller  rural  communities:  there  the  master  devoted 
his  attention  to  one  pupil  at  a  time,  with  extremely 
imequal  results. 

The  revised  charter  of  1830  promised  the  liberty  of  educa- 
tion, i.e.,  the  end  of  the  monopoly  established  by  Napoleon. 
But  this  promise  was  not  kept.  Lamennais,  Lacordaire,  and 
Montalembert,  who,  on  the  strength  of  it,  had  opened  an 
independent  school,  were  prosecuted.  The  Voltairian  Liberals 
who  assumed  power  were  great  admirers  of  the  Emperor,  and 
therefore  of  the  University,  one  of  his  most  personal  creations. 
They  cherished  it  all  the  more  because  it  was  obnoxious  to 
the  Church.  The  constitutional,  anti-clerical,  theistic,  and 
bourgeois  spirit  which  prevailed  in  it  was  theirs.  Like  the 
advisers  of  Louis  XVIII,  they  were  loath  to  deprive  themselves 
of  such  an  admirable  means  of  domination.  The  reign  of  Louis- 
Philippe  represents  the  heyday  of  the  University.  Under 
Napoleon  it  was  still  in  its  formative  stage;  under  the 
Restoration  it  was  treated  with  suspicion,  governed  by  men 
like  Mgr.  de  Frayssinous,  who,  "hopeless  of  getting  any  good 
out  of  it,  was  merely  trying  to  prevent  as  much  harm  as  he 
could."  After  1830,  with  such  Ministers  and  Grand  Masters 
as  Guizot,  Cousin,  Villemain,  and  even  Salvandy,  it  reached 
its  fullest  development. 

However,  it  was  weakened  by  its  very  triumph :  it  lost  to 
politics  some  of  its  best-known  masters,  whose  places  were 
filled  year  after  year  by  less  famous — and  underpaid — substi- 
tutes. The  College  de  France,  instead  of  the  Sorbonne,  became 
the  centre  of  attraction;  there  Michelet,  Quinet,  and  a  Polish 
refugee,  Mickiewicz,  preached  to  eager  audiences  the  gospel 
of  democracy.  In  the  forties,  the  old  college  was  indeed  a 
church,  and  Quinet  was  justified  in  likening  his  mission  to 
that  of  an  Emerson  or  a  Channing.  It  was  greatly  through 
these  three  warm-hearted  poets,  historians,  and  prophets  that 
the  rising  generation  was  permeated  with  romantic  humani- 
tarianism.  They  heralded  the  Revolution  of  1848,  with  its 
beautiful  Utopian  spirit.  From  the  scientific  point  of  view 


234     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXrn  CENTURY 

their  courses  did  not  count :  they  did  not  even  have  the  incentive 
value  of  Cousin's,  Guizot's,  and  Villemain's ;  their  message  was 
to  the  people.  It  was  at  the  Normal  School,  and  especially 
at  the  Archives,  that  Michelet  did  his  admirable  work  as  a 
scholar  and  a  teacher. 

This  was  also  the  time  when  the  University  was  most 
consistently  and  most  bitterly  assailed.  Canon  Desgarets, 
Montaleinbert,  Veuillot,  led  the  attack.  Cousin,  Villemain, 
defended  their  position  with  ability  and  authority.  Quinet, 
Michelet,  made  a  counter-campaign  against  the  Jesuits.  Guizot 
was  caught  between  his  party  allegiance  and  his  professed 
principles.  Thus  the  fight  went  on,  and  Louis-Philippe  fell 
before  any  conclusion  was  reached.  But  the  Catholics  had 
not  wasted  their  efforts.  The  bourgeoisie,  grown  conservative 
now  that  it  was  in  power,  was  beginning  to  look  with  less  favour 
upon  the  University,  and  to  seek  an  alliance  with  the  Church. 
Cousin  himself  had  lost  much  of  his  assurance:  he  now  offered 
his  philosophy  rather  as  an  introduction  to  religion  than  as 
an  improvement  upon  it.  Guizot  dealt  with  the  Jesuits  with 
half-hearted,  unconvincing  rigour — much  more  leniently  than 
Vatimesnil  had  done  under  Charles  X.  This  change  of  attitude 
was  hastened  by  the  Revolution  of  1848.  But  it  was  well 
under  way  as  early  as  1845. 

To  the  government  of  the  Citizen  King  belongs  the  credit  of 
having  for  the  first  time  organized  popular  education.  The  law 
of  June  22,  1833,  prepared  by  Guizot,  may  seem  timid  and 
incomplete  compared  with  the  ambitious  schemes  of  the 
Eevolution  or  with  modern  achievements.  But  it  was  a  radical 
improvement.  Each  "  commune  "  was  compelled  to  keep  up  at 
least  one  primary  school.  Towns  over  6,000  were  obliged  to 
maintain  in  addition  one  higher  primary  school.  To  meet  the 
expenditure,  3  per  cent,  was  added  to  local  direct  taxes. 
Should  this  resource  prove  inadequate,  the  department  or  the 
State  would  make  up  the  deficiency.*  Attendance  was  not 

•  Only  boys'  schools  were  considered.  The  education  of  girls  was  not 
organized  until  three  years  later,  and  as  this  was  done  by  an  ordinance 
Instead  of  a  law,  the  local  bodies  could  not  be  compelled  to  provide  the 
funds.  Girls'  schools  were  thus  Ignored  until  1850. 


EDUCATION  235 

compulsory,  only  pauper  children  were  excused  from  tuition 
fees,  salaries  were  ridiculously  small,  and  in  populous  cities 
classes  were  so  large  that  the  monitorial  system  had  still  to 
be  resorted  to.  In  1847  the  State  spent  only  3,000,000  francs 
for  public  education,  and  nearly  40,000,000  for  public  worship. 
But  the  system  worked,  and,  modest  though  it  was,  results  were 
soon  apparent.  In  1830  more  than  one-half  of  the  military 
contingent  could  neither  read  nor  write.  In  1847  the  pro- 
portion had  fallen  to  one-third. 

§  3.  SECOND  REPUBLIC  AND  SECOND  EMPIRE. 

The  Revolution  of  1848 — The  Falloux  law  on  the  liberty  of  educa- 
tion— Clerical  influences  under  Napoleon  III — Reaction  under 
Fortoul — Admirable  work  by  Victor  Duruy. 

The  Revolution  of  1848,  like  the  Convention  of  1792,  held 
out  magnificent  promises.  The  liberty  of  education  was  for- 
mally declared  in  the  Constitution.  Hippolyte  Carnot,  the  son 
of  Lazare  Carnot,  the  "  Organizer  of  Victory,"  became  Minister 
of  Public  Education.  He  planned  to  make  elementary  schools 
unsectarian,  gratuitous,  and  compulsory.  Little  came  out  of 
these  high  ambitions.  The  only  actual  foundation  of  Carnot 
was  a  Superior  School  of  Administration,  which  disappeared 
soon  after  his  fall. 

The  promised  liberty  of  education  was  realized  through  the 
Falloux  law,  but  not  in  the  generous,  democratic  spirit  in  which 
it  had  been  announced.  "  Three  facts,"  says  M.  Liard,  "  are 
bound  together  like  the  terms  of  a  syllogism  in  the  short  public 
career  of  M.  de  Falloux.  The  closing  of  the  national  work- 
shops causes  the  upheaval  of  June.  The  Days  of  June  strike 
the  bourgeoisie  with  terror.  The  terrified  bourgeoisie  vote  the 
law  of  1850  as  a  measure  of  social  preservation."  *  In  the 
committee  in  charge  of  the  bill,  Thiers  and  Cousin,  once  the 
stanchest  supporters  of  lay  education,  were  now  willing  to  turn 
it  over  to  the  clergy.  "The  40,000  schoolmasters  are  40,000 
priests  of  atheism  and  socialism,"  said  Thiers.  Some  Catholics 
hoped  that  the  Church  would  secure  absolute  control  of  all 

•  L.  Liard.  L'Enseignement  Superieur,  etc.,  ii,  233. 


236     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

schools.  This,  however,  did  not  come  to  pass.  Thiers  was  one 
of  those  Voltairians  who  thought  that  religion  was  needed  for 
the  people,  not  for  themselves:  whilst  entrusting  elementary 
education  to  priests,  nuns,  and  friars,  he  would  have  liked  to 
keep  intact  the  authority  of  the  State  in  secondary  education. 
Cousin  wanted  to  save  the  University,  as  it  had  been  saved 
under  the  Eestoration,  by  placing  it  under  the  supervision  and 
influence  of  the  clergy.  The  erstwhile  anti-clerical  bourgeoisie, 
therefore,  did  not  surrender  unconditionally.  It  was  necessary 
to  come  to  a  compromise.  The  Catholic  leaders,  on  the  other 
hand,  Dupanloup,  Falloux,  Montalembert,  were  enlightened  men, 
and  belonged  to  the  liberal  wing  of  their  party.  The  Falloux 
law  was  extremely  disappointing  for  the  fanatics.  They  roundly 
charged  de  Falloux  with  treason.  Many  of  its  provisions  have 
long  since  been  amended.  But  in  spite  of  the  constant  attacks 
of  the  Radicals,  its  principle  stands  to  the  present  day.  This 
is  sufficient  justification  for  this  much-maligned  measure. 

The  Falloux  law  dealt  exclusively  with  elementary  and 
secondary  education.  Its  first  effect  was  to  destroy  the  Napoleonic 
University.  Public  education  ceased  to  form  a  separate  entity, 
a  corporation,  an  order,  with  its  Grand  Master,  its  endowment, 
its  civil  rights  and  privileges:  it  became  an  administrative 
department  like  any  other.  The  Church  was  thus  rid  of  a 
potential  rival  in  spiritual  leadership. 

It  was  well  understood  that  the  Church  alone  would  profit  by 
the  liberty  of  education:  she  alone  had  the  organization,  the 
financial  resources,  and  the  prestige  required  for  such  an  under- 
taking. But  "  liberty "  was  not  enough :  she  secured  valuable 
privileges.  The  bishops  were  ex-officio  members  of  the  academic 
councils,  and  their  authority  therein  was  really  greater  than 
that  of  the  rectors  themselves.*  Catholic  schools  could  be 
endowed  and  subsidized  by  the  local  authorities  and  by  the 
State.  Bishops  and  priests  could  open  secondary  schools  with- 
out any  of  the  formalities  imposed  upon  their  lay  rivals.  In 
elementary  education,  the  letter  of  affiliation  (or  "  letter  of 
obedience ")  of  a  friar  or  a  nun  was  accepted  instead  of  a 

*  The  number  of  "  academies  "  and  rectors  had  been  Increased  to  89 — 
one  in  each  department.  That  made  the  rector  a  comparatively  small 
personage. 


EDUCATION  237 

qualifying  certificate.  But  the  Catholics  failed  to  carry  one  of 
their  most  important  points:  the  granting  of  degrees  remained 
the  monopoly  of  the  State. 

Did  Louis-Napoleon,  in  order  to  gain  the  support  of  the 
Catholics,  promise  them  further  advantages — -perhaps  even  that 
complete  control  of  education  which  had  ever  been  the  goal  of 
their  desires?  There  were  rumours  to  that  effect,  but  they 
cannot  be  substantiated.  Certain  it  is  that,  whilst  Napoleon, 
during  the  first  period  of  his  reign,  from  the  coup  d'etat  to  the 
Italian  campaign,  was  the  stanch  ally  of  the  Church,  he  no  less 
firmly  refused  to  become  her  tool.  The  law  of  1854  strengthened 
the  hands  of  the  State  in  educational  matters.  The  number  of 
academic  districts  was  reduced  from  89  to  15 :  the  rector  was 
thereby  restored  to  a  position  of  influence,  and  was  better  able 
to  hold  his  own  against  the  bishop. 

The  administration  of  Minister  Fortoul,  from  1851  to  1856, 
has  remained  famous  for  its  reactionary  character.  An  oath  of 
personal  allegiance  to  the  President  or  Emperor  was  exacted  of 
every  educator:  whoever  refused  to  take  it  was  debarred  from 
teaching.  Villemain,  Cousin,  Guizot  were  put  on  the  retired 
list.  Michelet,  Quinet,  Mickiewicz  lost  their  professorships  at 
the  College  de  France.  Many  others — Barthelemy  Saint- 
Hilaire,  Vacherot,  Jules  Simon,  Barni,  Challemel-Lacour  were 
summarily  dismissed.  Philosophy  in  the  lycees  was  reduced 
to  formal  logic.  Contemporary  history  was  excluded.  The 
course  of  studies  was  "  bifurcated " :  students  were  required 
to  choose,  when  much  too  young  for  such  a  decision,  between 
two  branches,  the  one  exclusively  scientific,  the  other  ex- 
clusively literary.  Minister  Rouland,  not  a  very  competent 
man  either,  corrected  some  of  the  mistakes  of  his  predecessor 
(1856-63). 

After  1859,  and  especially  about  1863,  the  Empire  became 
more  liberal.  Fortunately  the  right  man  was  found  to  carry  out 
the  new  policy.  One  of  Napoleon's  hobbies  was  to  write  a  life 
of  Caesar,  his  hero,  the  prototype  of  those  "  providential  men  " 
among  whom  he  hoped  some  day  to  rank.  Among  the  scholars 
whom  he  consulted  was  Victor  Duruy.  He  liked  the  man, 
promoted  him  to  be  inspector-general,  and,  in  1863,  quite  unex- 


238     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-m  CENTURY 

pectedly,  made  him  his  Minister  of  Public  Education.  Duruy 
proved  equal  to  the  task. 

The  law  of  1867  increased  the  number  and  extended  the 
curriculum  of  primary  schools.  Ten  thousand  public  libraries — 
humble,  to  be  sure,  but  of  incalculable  usefulness — were  created. 
Elementary  education  was  made  practically  gratuitous.  Duruy 
wanted  to  make  it  compulsory  as  well,  and  had  won  the  Emperor 
to  his  view  when  he  was  driven  from  office.  In  1866  he  granted 
official  recognition  to  the  Education  League  (Ligue  de  1'Enseigne- 
ment),  founded  in  Alsace  by  a  young  teacher,  Jean  Mace,  and 
two  journeymen.  He  encouraged  evening  classes  for  adults 
and  popular  lectures. 

In  secondary  education  he  repaired  the  harm  done  under 
Fortoul,  suppressed  the  "  bifurcation,"  restored  the  study  of 
philosophy,  introduced  that  of  contemporary  history,  and  created, 
by  the  side  of  the  classical  course,  a  "special"  one,  meant  to 
be  more  practical.  He  had  planned  a  system  of  public  high 
schools  for  girls,  but  the  opposition  of  the  clergy  in  this  case 
was  too  strong  for  him.  In  superior  education,  breaking  away 
resolutely  from  the  false  ideal  of  catering  to  the  general  public, 
he  fostered  the  seminar  method  by  the  creation  of  the 
"Practical  School  of  Superior  Studies."  It  was  through  him, 
and  thanks  to  the  genuine  interest  of  Napoleon  III  in  these 
matters,  that  Claude  Bernard,  Pasteur,  Berthelot,  Robin,  were 
encouraged  in  their  researches  and  provided  with  laboratories, 
still  woefully  inadequate,  but  much  better  equipped  than  in 
the  previous  decade. 

This  progressive  policy  roused  the  suspicion  and  anger  of  the 
Church.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  materialism,  positivism,  and 
even  atheism  were  at  that  time  rampant  among  scientific  men. 
For  one  Pasteur,  who  knew  that  there  was  something  which 
his  microscope  could  not  reveal,  there  were  many  followers  of 
Littr6  and  Robin — earnest  servants  of  truth,  no  doubt,  but 
bigoted  in  their  negative  attitude.  This  was  the  pretext  of 
a  new  attack,  led  by  Mgr.  Dupanloup,  against  State  teach- 
ing in  general,  the  Paris  Medical  School  in  particular,  and 
Duruy  personally.  The  matter  was  brought,  in  the  form  of 
a  petition,  before  the  Imperial  Senate,  and  was  debated 


EDUCATION  239 

with  a  fullness  which   does  credit  to   the   Assembly   and  the 
time.* 

The  irony  of  fate,  in  the  shape  of  political  combinations, 
drove  Duruy  from  the  Ministry  at  the  very  moment  when  the 
Empire  was  becoming  decidedly  liberal.  Duruy  was  sincerely 
attached  to  his  Imperial  master,  who  for  six  years  had  shielded 
him  from  the  hostility  of  the  clerical  party;  but  he  was 
thoroughly  democratic  and  progressive.  On  that  account  he 
is  perhaps  the  only  Bonapartist  official  to  whom  his  Republican 
successors  have  shown  any  fairness.  He  ranks  with  Guizot  and 
Jules  Ferry  among  the  master-builders  of  French  education. 

§  4.  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC. 

S  4.  Elementary  Education. — Law  of  1875  on  the  liberty  of  superior 
education — Jules  Ferry,  Paul  Bert,  and  the  National  school  system 
— Anti-clericalism:  about  1880 — Revival  after  the  Dreyfus  case — 
The  neutrality  problem — Achievements  of  the  Republic — Short- 
comings. 

The  crisis  of  primary  education,  material  and  moral — Socialism 
and  syndicalism  among  the  teachers. 

§  5.  The  Third  Republic:  Secondary  and  Superior  Education. — 
Secondary- — The  Church  holds*  her  own — Reorganization  of  the 
course — The  Reform  of  1902. 

Superior  Education. — Creation  of  local  universities,  1896 — Uni- 
versity of  Paris:  its  material  importance  and  prestige — The  provin- 
cial universities — Their  activities — Alleged  excess  of  the  scientific 
spirit — General  culture  outside  the  universities:  literary  lectures, 
etc. 

Note  on  the  Popular  Universities. 

"  It  is  the  German  schoolmaster  that  conquered  at  Sadowa 
and  Sedan."  France  accepted  this  verdict,  and  the  war  of  1870 
was  immediately  followed  by  a  great  movement  in  favour  of 
universal  education.  Jean  Mace's  League  started  a  petition 
which  was  soon  covered  with  a  million  signatures.  Yet,  for  ten 
years,  little  was  achieved.  The  political  status  of  the  country 
was  uncertain.  The  conservatives  were  in  power,  but  not 
strong  and  unanimous  enough  to  carry  out  any  definite  scheme 
of  their  own.  The  democrats  were  waiting  for  their  chance  of 
turning  the  nominal  and  provisional  Republic  into  a  permanent 
reality.  One  advantage,  however,  did  the  conservative  party 

•  L'Enaeignement  Superior  devant  le  Senat,  Discussion  extraite  du 
ifoniteur,  18mo,  Hetzel,  1868 ;  cf.  Sainte-Beuve's  speech. 


240     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

secure :  it  gave  the  Falloux  law  its  long-deferred  complement 
relative  to  the  liberty  of  superior  education.  Four  Catholic 
universities  were  immediately  founded  at  Lille,  Paris,  Angers, 
and  Lyons,  with  an  isolated  law  school  at  Toulouse.  Mixed 
juries  of  .State  and  Church  professors  were  to  grant  the  degrees. 
Only  one  institution  independent  of  Church  and  State  alike  was 
created:  the  Free  School  of  Political  Sciences.  Taine  and 
Boutmy,  the  fathers  of  the  scheme,  hoped  to  prepare  for  their 
country  a  generation  of  competent  officials  to  help  in  the  work 
of  national  regeneration.  Without  becoming  such  a  power  in 
the  land,  the  school  has  a  very  creditable  record. 

As  soon  as  reaction  was  finally  defeated,  the  Republican  party 
proceeded  with  its  educational  programme.  The  man  who 
assumed  this  huge  responsibility  was  Jules  Ferry,  one  of  the 
few  constructive  statesmen  of  the  present  regime,  the  peer  of 
Gambetta  and  Waldeck-Rousseau.  He  was  ably  seconded  by 
Paul  Bert,  a  physiologist  of  some  repute,  but,  in  politics  and  in 
religion,  a  man  of  more  sectarian  outlook  than  his  chief.  The 
reorganization  of  popular  education  meant  war  with  the  clergy. 
Not  that  the  lay  schools  were  intended  to  be  atheistic,  anti- 
catholic,  or  even  anti-clerical ;  but  they  were  neutral  in  religious 
matters,  and  Rome  maintains  that  neutrality  and  hostility  are 
synonymous.  "  Without  the  Church  there  is  no  salvation." 
The  Catholics,  whose  spokesman  was  an  active,  eloquent,  and 
thoroughly  modern  prelate,  Mgr.  Freppel,  made  desperate 
efforts  to  prevent  the  vote  of  the  education  Bills.  The  Repub- 
licans were  ready  with  their  reply.  By  a  law  passed  in  1880 
the  mixed  juries  established  in  1875  were  suppressed  and  the 
State  resumed  the  monopoly  of  granting  university  degrees. 
Article  VII  of  that  same  law  debarred  members  of  non-author- 
ized religious  communities  from  giving  any  kind  of  teaching.* 
The  proper  certificates  were  required  of  everybody,  instead  of 
the  letter  of  "  obedience/'  Gradually  friars  and  nuns  were 
eliminated  from  the  public  schools  and  their  positions  filled  by 
lay  teachers.  This  went  on,  sluggishly  at  times,  for  twenty 

•  This  article  was  rejected  by  the  Senate.  Thereupon  Ferry,  upheld  by 
the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  dissolved  and  expelled  a  certain  number  of  these 
illegal  organizations ;  cf.  Chapters  V.  and  VIII. 


EDUCATION  241 

years.  The  victory  of  the  Eadicals,  after  the  Dreyfus  crisis, 
gave  a  new  impetus  to  this  policy  of  secularization.  That  the 
State,  professedly  unsectarian,  should  not  salary  denominational 
instruction  is  a  defensible  point  of  view.  Premier  Combes  went 
farther.  In  1903  recognition  was  denied  to  the  religious 
Orders  which  had  applied  for  it  under  the  Waldeck-Rousseau 
law  on  associations.  Still,  the  Brothers  of  the  Christian 
Doctrine  and  a  few  other  communities,  authorized  by 
Napoleon,  retained  their  legal  status.  In  1904  a  new  law  was 
passed,  providing  that  within  ten  years  all  schools  under  the 
control  of  religious  Orders  should  be  secularized  or  closed.  This 
drastic  policy  was  relentlessly  applied  by  Emile  Combes  himself, 
and  is  carried  on,  although  more  cautiously,  by  his  successors. 
The  ideal  of  certain  Radicals  is  manifestly  that  the  State  should 
be  the  sole  educator:  all  French  children  should  be  brought  up 
in  the  principles  of  "  modern  civilization  "  and  steeled  against 
the  prejudices  and  superstitions  of  the  "obscurantists."  They 
would  fain  adopt,  with  some  slight  correction,  the  motto  of  old 
monarchical  France :  "  One  faith,  one  law,  one  king."  There 
are  signs,  however,  that  this  sectarian  spirit  is  on  the  wane. 
The  feud  between  the  former  anti-clerical  allies — the  Radical 
bourgeoisie  and  the  socialistic  people — has  brought  home  to 
both  the  dangers  of  monopoly. 

Meanwhile,  the  Catholic  schools,  secularized  but  in  name, 
continue  to  exist,  if  not  to  thrive.  But  the  Church  can  no 
longer  hope  to  compete  with  the  State  in  elementary  education : 
the  financial  burden  is  too  enormous.  So  the  latest  move  is  to 
attack  the  State  schools  from  within :  "  We  are  practically  com- 
pelled to  attend  these  schools/'  the  Catholics  contend.  "  We  pay 
for  them  like  all  other  French  citizens.  The  law  expressly 
provides  that  they  shall  be  neutral :  it  is  our  right  and  our  duty 
to  enforce  the  fulfilment  of  this  promise."  Every  text-book 
not  agreeable  to  Catholic  parents,  every  unguarded  word  of  a 
freethinking  teacher,  is  denounced  by  the  priests.  The 
position  of  certain  schoolmasters  has  thus  become  intolerable: 
they  have  brought  suits  in  their  turn  against  their  critics,  and 
the  dwindling  but  still  powerful  Radical  majority  is  planning 
legislative  measures  for  the  "  protection  of  lay  teaching."  Thus 


242     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

every  village  school  is  a  battlefield  and  the  new  generation  is 
brought  up  in  an  atmosphere  of  hatred. 

It  is  a  relief  to  turn  from  this  record  of  strife  to  one  of  positive 
achievement.  Within  the  last  thirty  years  the  Republic  has 
done  noble  work.  Elementary  education  was  made  compulsory, 
gratuitous,  and  secular  by  the  laws  of  1881  and  1882.  Money 
was  lavishly  spent  for  school  buildings.  "  As  mediaeval  Europe 
clad  herself  in  a  white  mantle  of  churches,  so  democratic  France 
covered  herself  with  schools."  Teachers'  salaries  were  increased, 
their  tenure  of  office  was  made  more  permanent,  representa- 
tives were  given  them  in  departmental  and  national  councils 
(Conseil  Superieur  de  1'Instruction  Publique).  In  1870  the 
budget  of  elementary  education  was  61,500,000  francs;  in 
1877,  94,397,554;  in  1902,  236,598,969;  in  1912,  297,944,599. 
Every  teacher  is  now  duly  certificated,  and  many  of  them  hold 
a  higher  degree.  Thanks  to  the  creation  of  a  number  of 
normal  schools  and  of  two  superior  normal  schools,*  they  are 
much  better  informed  and  more  scientifically  trained  than 
formerly.  Their  social  standing  has  been  raised  in  the  same 
proportion :  the  schoolmaster  is  no  longer  a  pauper,  as  under 
the  Restoration,  or  the  cure's  humble  subordinate,  as  under  the 
Empire.  And,  under  the  leadership  of  splendid  men  like 
Ferdinand  Buisson,  Felix  Pecaut,  Octave  Gr6ard,  it  cannot  be 
said  that  the  moral  aspect  of  their  mission  has  been  neg- 
lected.f 

However,  there  is  a  tendency  among  Republicans  to  claim  for 
their  party  the  sole  credit  for  this  progress.  It  may  be  well  to 
bear  in  mind  that  under  Louis-Philippe  and  Napoleon  III 
education  had  advanced  at  a  still  faster  rate ;  $  that  the  salaries 
paid  to  French  teachers  are  inferior  to  those  of  their  English 

•  At  Fontenay-aux-Roses  for  women  and  at  Saint-Cloud  for  men. 

t  Buisson,  Director-General  of  Primary  Education ;  Pecaut,  Director  of 
the  Superior  Normal  School  for  Girls,  Fontenay-aux-Roses ;  Grgard, 
Director  of  Education  for  Paris. 

t  School  enrolment— 1837,  2,690,035;  1850,  3,322,423  (+632,388  in  thir- 
teen years)  ;  1876,  4,716.935  (  +  1,394,512  in  twenty-seven  years)  ;  1904. 
5,448,030  (+  731,095  In  twenty-eight  years)  ;  of  course,  with  a  stationary 
population  and  a  number  of  children  of  school  age  actually  decreasing  the 
school  enrolment  cannot  indefinitely  progress,  but  the  efforts  of  previous 
regimes  should  not  be  ignored  or  minimized. 


EDUCATION  243 

and  German  colleagues;  that  France,  although  far  ahead  of  the 
Catholic  countries,  Italy,  Spain,  and  Belgium,  is  still  behind 
those  where  Protestantism  prevails;  that  whilst  monarchical 
Prussia  has  stamped  out  illiteracy  altogether  there  are  still  four 
French  conscripts  out  of  every  hundred  who  can  neither  read 
nor  write. 

The  teaching  profession  is  at  present  going  through  a  crisis 
which  has  material  and  moral  causes.  For  some  twenty  years 
after  the  Ferry  laws  all  went  apparently  well.  The  danger  came 
from  without — from  the  Church.  Schoolmasters  preached  un- 
questioningly  "  the  immortal  principles  of  1789  "  and  the  gospel 
of  patriotism.  They  devoted  their  spare  hours  to  extension  and 
social  work — popular  lectures,  savings  banks,  mutual  help 
societies.  In  reward  they  were  surfeited  with  fulsome  praise  by 
Radical  politicians  and  their  salaries  seemed  large  in  comparison 
with  those  of  the  immediate  past.  But,  like  all  persons  with  a 
fixed  income,  they  suffered  sharply  from  the  sudden  increase  in 
the  cost  of  living  which  marked  the  last  fifteen  years.  Unlike 
employees  in  private  industries,  they  had  no  means  of  voicing 
their  economic  grievances  except  through  the  influence  of  some 
friendly  member  of  Parliament.  Now,  lobbying  for  larger  pay 
is  a  form  of  begging,  and  the  teachers  did  not  like  it :  first  cause 
of  discontent.  Circumstances  had  often  pitted  the  schoolmaster 
against  the  parish  priest.  He  was  the  local  representative  of 
Republican  ideas:  as  such,  his  position  was,  in  the  broadest 
sense,  a  political  one.  This  was  emphasized  by  the  fact  that 
he  was  appointed  and  could  be  removed  by  a  purely  political 
official,  the  Prefect.  Now,  some  clever  and  unscrupulous  teachers 
took  advantage  of  the  situation  and  secured  promotion  as  a 
reward  for  political  services.  The  great  majority  of  the  pro- 
fession, sincerely  Republican  at  heart,  but  unwilling  to  turn 
themselves  into  electoral  agents,  resented  this  interference  of 
the  politicians  and  asked  to  be  placed  exclusively  under  the 
authority  of  their  academic  superior,  the  rector.  Second 
grievance. 

During  the  Dreyfus  crisis  the  Radical  and  anti-clerical 
bourgeoisie  fought  side  by  side  with  the  more  advanced  parties, 
Socialists  and  Anarchists,  and,  in  the  heat  of  conflict,  denounced 


244     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

"  militarism,  chauvinism,  social  prejudices,  economic  injustice  " 
with  a  vigour  akin  to  violence.  The  teachers  were  in  the  thick 
of  the  fray.  They  were  men  of  the  people  themselves  and 
naturally  inclined  to  socialism.  Many  of  them  were  converted 
to  revolutionary  ideas.  Their  encyclopaedic  and  perforce  super- 
ficial learning,  their  habit  of  laying  down  the  law  to  immature 
minds,  made  them  somewhat  dogmatic  in  their  attitude.  They 
began  to  preach  pacifism,  internationalism,  and  socialism  with 
the  same  zeal  as,  ten  years  before,  they  had  preached  the  hoary 
doctrines  of  the  first  Revolution.  Dissatisfaction  with  their 
economic  conditions;  revolt  against  the  rule  of  professional 
politicians;  aspirations  towards  internationalism  and  socialism: 
the  teachers  wanted  to  express  all  that,  and  they  found  syndi- 
calism ready  at  hand.  So  they  formed  syndicates  or  unions  and 
sought  affiliation  to  the  General  Federation  of  Labour.  The 
Radical  bourgeoisie,  as  soon  as  they  were  through  with  their 
anti-clerical  campaign,  discovered  this  new  danger  and  recoiled 
with  almost  the  same  terror  as  M.  Thiers  in  1848.  The  situa- 
tion is  serious.  It  could  be  relieved  by  taking  politics  out  of 
public  education  and  by  increasing  salaries  on  a  generous  scale. 
But  the  politicians  will  not  willingly  give  up  their  patronage, 
and  military  expenditures  are  draining  the  resources  of  the  State. 
The  fact  that  so  many  teachers  have  gone  over  to  revolutionary 
socialism  would  still  remain  a  menace.* 

Thus  we  now  have  a  three-cornered  fight.  As  anti-clericals 
and  Republicans  the  teachers  are  supported,  more  or  less  warmly, 
by  the  Government.  As  .Socialists  and  Internationalists  they 
are  combated.  The  bourgeois  papers  no  longer  tell  them  that 
they  are  the  hope  of  democracy,  the  priests  of  the  new  order. 
They  are  advised  to  be  prudent,  modest,  even  humble-minded, 
to  "  know  their  places "  and  eschew  "  dangerous  doctrines." 
We  are  once  more  brought  face  to  face  with  the  fact  that 
neutrality  in  elementary  education  is  a  myth.  As  soon  as  we 
go  beyond  the  three  R's  some  philosophy  of  life  is  implied.  Is 

•  Another  solution,  which,  as  far  as  we  know,  has  not  been  seriously  con- 
sidered, would  be  gradually  to  eliminate  all  men  teachers.  Women  are 
more  conservative  and  satisfied  with  lower  salaries.  The  example  of 
America  shows  that  it  can  be  done.  But  it  would  not  afford  Immediate 


EDUCATION  245 

the  State  justified  in  enforcing  conformity  to  doctrines  which  a 
large  minority  of  the  people  cannot  accept?  The  question  is  a 
thorny  one  and  the  solution  not  yet  in  sight.  Fortunately, 
these  difficulties  do  not  prevent  most  teachers  from  fulfilling 
with  simple  faithfulness  their  essential  duties. 

§  5.  THE     THIRD     REPUBLIC:     SECONDARY     AND     SUPERIOR 
EDUCATION. 

In  secondary  education  the  advantage  remains  with  the 
Church.  In  spite  of  Governmental  pressure  she  still  educates 
fully  one-half  of  the  children  of  the  middle  and  upper  classes. 
In  purely  scientific  value  her  schools  may  be  inferior  to  those  of 
the  State;  the  culture  they  give  is  narrower  and  less  original. 
Yet  they  are  popular,  were  it  only  for  social  reasons.  Parvenus 
or  scheming  parents  like  to  send  their  sons  to  Jesuit  colleges, 
where  they  will  meet  the  scions  of  the  aristocracy,  learn  good 
manners,  and  make  useful  acquaintances.  The  Fathers  are 
known  to  follow  and  help  their  pupils  through  life.  Perhaps 
the  qualities  of  intellectual  courage  and  moral  self-reliance  are 
not  properly  emphasized  in  ecclesiastical  education.  But  other 
qualities,  more  negative,  yet  of  undeniable  value,  are  patiently 
instilled :  piety,  discipline,  reverence,  self-denial.  If  the  Fathers 
do  not  teach  how  to  think,  they  can  teach  how  to  speak  and 
write  with  refined  fluency.  Their  somewhat  artificial  methods 
of  cramming  facts  and  ready-made  opinions  are  highly  successful 
in  certain  competitive  examinations.  They  claim — and  there 
may  be  some  truth  in  the  contention — that  whilst  a  State 
boarding-school  is  a  jail  a  Church  school  is  a  home.  For  the 
education  of  girls  the  Church  is  supreme.  The  State  attempted 
practically  nothing  in  that  line  until  1880,  and  for  many  years 
the  few  lycees  for  girls  did  not  show  any  vitality.  They  seem 
to  have  been  more  successful  of  late. 

The  Radicals  have  tried  to  cripple  Church  education  in  the 
secondary  as  well  as  in  the  elementary  grades.  It  remains  to 
be  seen  whether  the  laws  of  Emile  Combes  will  be  any  more 
effective  than  the  ordinances  of  Vatimesnil  under  the  Restora- 
tion, the  orders  of  Guizot  under  Louis-Philippe,  or  the  decrees 
of  Jules  Ferry  under  the  present  regime.  It  is  especially  with 


246     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlX-m  CENTURY 

reference  to  secondary  education  that  the  Falloux  law  is 
obnoxious  to  the  anti-clericals.  As  a  step  towards  monopoly 
they  propose  that  Government  positions  should  be  reserved  to 
the  alumni  of  Government  schools.  The  Church,  on  the  other 
hand,  chafes  under  the  obligation  of  having  her  courses  pre- 
scribed and  her  students  examined  by  lay  educators.  Is  it  true 
that  the  existence  of  clerical  schools  perpetuates  the  unhappy 
division  of  the  country?  The  schism  exists,  but  its  causes  are 
deeper.  Unity  could  not  be  restored  by  legislation.  Voltaire, 
Renan,  Anatole  France,  and  Emile  Combes  were  brought  up  in 
Catholic  institutions. 

The  State  lycees  and  the  local  colleges*  spurred  by  this 
formidable  rivalry,  have  valiantly  held  their  own.  Their  curri- 
culum was  repeatedly  reformed  so  as  to  make  it  more  varied  and 
more  practical.  Duruy's  "  special  course "  had  always  been 
looked  upon  as  somewhat  inferior  to  the  full  classical  training. 
In  creating  "modern  secondary  education"  in  1891  M.  Bour- 
geois expected  to  give  sciences  and  modern  languages  the  same 
status  as  Greek  and  Latin.  Certain  schools  like  Capital 
College  in  Paris,  which  specialized  in  that  new  branch,  com- 
pared favourably  with  the  best  classical  lyce~es.  By  1899  there 
existed  four  parallel  courses,  each  leading  to  a  separate  Bachelor's 
degree:  Classical  (letters),  Classical  (sciences),  Modern  (letters), 
Modern  (sciences).  But  there  was  much  dissatisfaction  about 
the  alleged  formal,  wasteful,  and  antiquated  character  of  all  of 
them.  The  classical  B.A.  or  B.S.  degrees  were  still  rated 
higher  than  their  Modern  equivalents. 

In  1899  a  great  investigation  was  undertaken  by  a  national 
committee  under  the  chairmanship  of  M.  A.  Ribot.  This  led  to 
a  total  reorganization  of  the  system  of  1902.  First  of  all,  the 
six  years  of  the  high  school  course  were  divided  into  two  self- 
contained  "  cycles,"  so  that  at  fifteen  or  sixteen  a  young  man 
could  leave  with  a  limited  but  well-rounded  education.  Then 
the  distinction  between  "classical"  and  "modern"  disap- 
peared. Each  cycle  was  divided  into  four  sections:  one  with 

•  The  only  difference  between  Iyc6e  and  college  Is  that  the  former  Is 
under  the  Immediate  control  of  the  State,  the  latter  belongs  to  the  local 
authority ;  the  lycfies,  found  only  in  large  cities,  have  the  pick  of  the 
teachers. 


EDUCATION  247 

Latin  and  Greek  as  major  subjects;  a  second  with  Latin 
and  modern  languages;  a  third  with  Latin  and  sciences; 
a  fourth  with  sciences  and  modern  languages.  Compared  with 
the  previous  arrangement,  this  marked  a  progress  of  Latin  (now 
taught  in  three  instead  of  two  sections)  and  a  regression  of  Greek. 
But  the  Latin  course  was  made  less  arduous  than  formerly, 
through  the  omission  of  "  obsolete "  exercises ;  and  the  direct 
method  was  extensively  applied  in  the  teaching  of  modern 
languages.  After  eleven  years  of  experience,  this  reform  still 
evokes  much  criticism.  It  is  charged  with  being  less  thorough 
than  the  old  without  being  any  more  practical.  We  are  told 
tli  ere  is  a  "  crisis "  in  the  use  and  teaching  of  the  French 
language.  The  new  generations  are  indifferent  to  the  logicalness 
of  thought  and  neatness  of  expression  so  dear  to  the  old  school. 
Leagues  are  formed  in  defence  of  the  humanities.  The 
"Modernists"  retort  that  the  Greeks  showed  such  spontaneous 
greatness  because  they  did  not  study  Latin. 

Naturally,  this  pedagogical  problem  has  its  social  aspect.  The 
lycees  are  no  longer  alone  in  the  field :  "  higher  primary  "  and 
"technical"  education  are  becoming  formidable  rivals.  The 
sons  of  the  people,  through  the  free  high  schools  and  the  normal 
schools,  are  forging  their  way  up  to  the  universities.  And  the 
universities,  thoroughly  democratic  and  up  to  date  in  their 
ideas,  are  willing  to  welcome  them.  This  means  the  triumph 
of  a  new  pragmatic  spirit  over  hallowed  traditions.  The 
bourgeoisie,  it  is  claimed,  desirous  of  keeping  a  monopoly  of  the 
professions,  use  the  expensive  humanistic  culture  as  a  fence  and 
Latin  as  a  shibboleth.  The  tone  of  certain  reactionary  papers 
when  speaking  of  "  1'esprit  primaire  "  would  lend  colour  to  this 
contention.  On  the  other  hand,  many  unprejudiced  thinkers 
believe  that  a  liberal  education  is  the  greatest  need  of  a 
democracy;  that  the  cultural  heritage  of  a  nation  is  a  treasure 
not  to  be  lightly  bartered  away;  that  France,  in  particular, 
whose  ambition  was  to  be  an  "  Athenian  Republic,"  should 
protect  herself  against  the  ubiquitous  Baeotian. 

The  development  of  superior  education  under  the  present 
regime  has  been  most  gratifying.  In  1885  the  advanced 
schools  of  each  academic  region,  hitherto  scattered  and  un- 


248     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

connected,  were  grouped  together  under  the  authority  of  a 
"general  council/'  This  was  the  first  step  towards  the 
creation  of  genuine  universities,  which  was  effected  in  1896. 
The  long  delay  was  due  to  the  conflict  of  local  interests.  It 
was  not  deemed  advisable  to  consider  each  existing  "  f  aculte  "  as 
the  nucleus  of  a  local  university :  the  attraction  of  Paris  was  so 
enormous  that  there  seemed  to  be  no  room  for  more  than  five  or 
six  provincial  centres  of  higher  learning.  But  no  city  was  willing 
to  forgo  its  claims.  The  law  of  1896  was  a  compromise.  The 
administrative  centre  of  each  academic  district  became  the  seat 
of  a  university.  Some  of  these  institutions  were  composed  of  the 
four  regular  schools  or  facultes:  law,  medicine,  letters,  and 
sciences.  Others  had  only  three  or  even  two.  It  was  not  without 
a  struggle  that  Douai,  for  instance,  lost  its  law  school  to  Lille ; 
and  the  University  of  Aix-Marseilles  is  still  divided  between  the 
two  cities:  the  colleges  of  law  and  letters  in  the  sleepy  old 
capital  of  Provence;  those  of  sciences  and  medicine  in  the 
bustling  commercial  metropolis. 

The  military  law  of  1889  provided  a  clientele  for  these 
universities.  Holders  of  certain  degrees  were  excused  from  two 
years  of  military  service.  So  the  sons  of  the  bourgeoisie,  hitherto 
satisfied  with  a  mere  baccalaureat,  found  it  profitable  to  study 
for  the  "  licence."  This  regime  lasted  long  enough  to  create  a 
sentiment  and  a  tradition.  When,  by  the  law  of  1905,  all 
educational  causes  of  military  exemptions  were  removed,  a  great 
falling  off  in  the  number  of  students  was  expected:  but  it  did 
not  take  place. 

One  half  of  the  total  number  of  students  in  France  are  enrolled 
in  the  University  of  Paris.  Under  the  splendid  leadership  of 
Vice-rector  Louis  Liard  *  the  old  Sorbonne  has  reconquered  her 
proud  position  as  the  world's  greatest  centre  of  learning.  It  has 
no  less  than  17,000  students,  of  whom  3,000  are  foreigners. 
The  administrative  offices,  the  Assembly  Hall,  the  Library,  the 
College  of  Letters,  the  Practical  School  of  Superior  Studies,  the 
School  of  Charters,  and  part  of  the  College  of  Sciences,  occupy 
the  New  Sorbonne.  This  magnificent  block  of  buildings  was 

•  Vice-rector  because  the  Minister  of  Public  Education  is  ex  offlcio  rector 
of  the  University  of  Paris. 


EDUCATION  249 

erected  by  NSnot,  from  1885  to  1901,  in  modernized  Louis  XIII 
style:  the  best  artists  of  the  time  have  been  employed  in  its 
decoration,  and  the  mural  painting  of  Puvis  de  Chavannes  in  the 
Grand  Amphitheatre  especially  is  held  to  be  a  masterpiece.  In 
addition  to  the  .Sorbonne,  the  other  schools  and  institutes  form  a 
veritable  academic  city  in  the  Latin  Quarter.  Furthermore,  the 
University  of  Paris  has  colonies  scattered  at  the  four  corners  of 
France:  at  Koscoff  in  Britanny,  at  Wimereux  near  Boulogne, 
at  Banyuls  and  Nice  in  the  extreme  South.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  College  de  France,  the  Museum  of  Natural  History,  both 
equal  to  their  splendid  traditions,  the  no  less  famous  school  of 
Fine  Arts,  the  different  Engineering  Schools,  the  Conservatoire  of 
Music  and  Elocution,  the  School  of  Modern  Oriental  Languages, 
although  belonging  to  the  State,  are  not  component  parts  of 
the  University.  Law  is  by  far  the  most  popular  subject: 
7..68S  students  (900  foreigners)  in  1910.  This  is  due  to  the  fact 
that  law  in  France  is  a  general  culture  course,  preparing  for 
administrative  duties,  the  civil  service,  politics,  journalism,  and 
business,  as  well  as  for  the  bench  and  bar.  Then  comes  medicine, 
with  4,080  (765  foreigners).  The  Colleges  of  Letters  and 
Sciences,  which  train  their  students  almost  exclusively  for  the 
teaching  profession,  have  the  smallest  enrolment — 'Letters,  3,115 
(1,028  foreign) ;  Sciences,  1,843  (461  foreign)— but  the  highest 
standard.  The  famous  Superior  Normal  School,  long  indepen- 
dent of  the  University,  has  finally  been  incorporated  with  it.  If 
we  consider  that  the  equivalent  of  the  freshman  and  sophomore 
years  are  given  in  the  lycees,  if  we  bear  in  mind  that  several 
important  departments  have  a  separate  organization  and  do  not 
contribute  to  that  huge  total  of  17,000,  we  come  to  realize  the 
enormous  size  of  the  University  of  Paris.  Its  material  prosperity, 
however,  is  but  the  outward  sign  of  its  intellectual  supremacy. 
It  offers  an  endless  and  yet  systematic  variety  of  courses,  ranging 
from  popular  lectures  to  personal  investigations  of  the  most 
exhaustive  character. 

This  splendid  success  of  the  University  of  Paris  was  to  a 
certain  extent  expected.  That  of  the  other  institutions  came  as 
a  pleasant  surprise,  even  to  the  most  optimistic.  It  is  often 
asserted  a  priori  that  decentralization  is  impossible  in  France: 


250     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

this  one  attempt  should  teach  us  better.  The  local  universities 
are  not  mere  replicas  of  the  Sorbonne  on  a  diminutive  scale. 
They  are  "  provincial "  in  the  best  sense  of  the  term :  open  wide 
to  new  ideas  from  all  over  the  world,  they  make  a  special  study 
of  local  conditions — historical,  geographical,  economic.  Like 
the  newer  universities  of  England  or  those  of  the  American 
Middle  West,  they  keep  in  touch  with  practical  life  and  enlist 
the  support  of  business  men.  Dijon,  for  instance,  has  an 
(Enological  Institute,  Lille  a  textile  museum,  Besangon  a 
special  laboratory  for  testing  watches  and  clocks.  Montpellier 
has  kept  its  mediaeval  fame  for  medicine,  Nancy  leads  in  physics 
and  forestry.  The  South- Western  group,  Bordeaux,  Toulouse, 
Montpellier,  keep  active  intercourse  with  the  Spanish-speaking 
countries ;  Grenoble  attracts  German  students  and  has  created  a 
Franco-Italian  Institute  at  Florence.  The  central  administration 
interferes  only  to  prevent  the  wasteful  duplication  of  efforts; 
every  legitimate  initiative  is  encouraged.  Private  benefactions, 
almost  unheard  of  for  that  purpose  in  the  nineteenth  century,  are 
no  longer  negligible,  and  the  cities  spend  money  freely  on  their 
universities. 

As  a  result  of  this  transformation,  the  French  system  of 
degrees  has  lost  its  rigid  simplicity.  There  is  an  almost  infinite 
variety  of  "  licences."  Original  research  is  as  far  as  practicable 
substituted  for  the  scholastic  examinations  of  former  days.  A 
new  Diploma  of  Superior  Studies  has  been  created  for  those 
students  who  wish  to  go  beyond  the  licence  without  expecting  to 
get  the  advanced  professional  title  of  Agrege.  As  the  Doctorates 
of  Sciences  and  Letters  were  almost  inaccessible  to  foreigners,  a 
"  Doctorat  d'Universite  "  has  been  established,  which  is  equiva- 
lent to  the  German  Ph.D. 

Need  we  say  that  the  universities  have  not  been  spared  by 
critics?  Some  useful  pessimists,  like  Mr.  Loth,  comparing 
their  equipment,  their  endowment,  their  organization  with  those 
of  their  German  rivals,  conclude  that  much  remains  to  be  done: 
a  most  excellent  spur  to  further  endeavour.  Others,  of  the 
humanistic  persuasion,  are  dismayed  by  the  "  new  spirit "  which 
pervades  superior  education.  The  vague  and  brilliant  lectures 
of  forty  years  ago,  which  were  performances  rather  than  lessons, 


EDUCATION  251 

were  bad  enough.  But  have  we  not  rushed  into  another 
extreme?  Is  not  erudition  stifling  culture?  The  modern 
scholar,  it  is  alleged,  can  neither  think  nor  write;  he  merely 
accumulates  documents,  piles  up  innumerable  "  slips  "  which  he 
does  not  even  attempt  to  classify.  If  this  were  true,  the  danger 
would  be  great  indeed.  But,  it  is  answered,  among  the  professors 
thus  arraigned  many  are  recognized  masters  of  lucid  generaliza- 
tion as  well  as  accurate  detail.  That  mediocre  students  suffer  at 
present  from  the  slip-mania  may  be  granted :  perhaps  a  Caro  or 
a  Deschanel  could  have  taught  them  instead  how  to  say  nothing 
with  consummate  grace.  But  a  method  is  not  to  be  judged  by 
the  failure  of  the  inefficient.  France  needs  the  discipline  of 
positive  facts ;  of  general  ideas  she  has  enough  and  to  spare. 

Fortunately  for  both  parties,  the  old-fashioned  course  is  not 
dead,  but  it  has  emigrated  beyond  the  walls  of  the  Sorbonne. 
It  would  be  a  loss  to  literature  if  such  lectures  as  those  of 
M.  Jules  Lemaitre  *  had  not  been  given.  A  well-known 
magazine,  Les  Annales,  has  created  a  "university"  where  an 
aristocratic  public,  cultured,  bigoted  in  essentials  but  open- 
minded  for  new-fangled  cults,  keenly  appreciative  of  certain 
literary  qualities,  rather  indifferent  to  mere  details,  and  scorning 
the  drudgery  of  research,  find  exactly  the  kind  of  teaching  to 
suit  their  needs  and  taste.  On  a  much  higher  level,  the  Free 
School  of  Social  Sciences  deals  in  a  serious  and  yet  accessible 
manner  with  questions  too  vast,  too  vague,  or  too  controversial 
for  the  Sorbonne  and  the  College  de  France.  This  division  of 
labour  between  the  regular  institutions  of  learning  and  private 
foundations  of  a  less  scientific  character  is  excellent,  and  might 
well  be  imitated  on  the  other  side  of  the  water,  f 

•  Rousseau,  Racine,  Ffinelon,  etc. 

t  An  _ambitious  movement  which  miscarried  after  an  auspicious  begin- 
ning was  that  of  the  Popular  Universities.  The  two  prototypes,  founded 
before  the  Dreyfus  crisis,  were  the  "  Co-operation  of  Ideas,"  created  by  a 
Joiner,  G.  Deherme,  as  a  school  of  clear  thinking  and  tolerance ;  and  the 
University  Foundation  of  Belleville,  started  by  Jacques  Bardoux  in  imita- 
tion of  Toynbee  Hall  and  other  settlements.  The  Dreyfus  case  gave  the 
movement  a  great  impetus:  intellectual  workers  and  manual  labourers 
communed  in  the  service  of  justice  and  truth.  But  the  basic  conception 
was  much  too  vague:  People's  Palaces,  University  Extensions,  Freethink- 
ers' Clubs — they  were  everything  and  nothing.  The  absence  of  common 
principles  soon  allowed  the  early  enthusiasm  to  cool.  Needless  to  say  that 


252     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

France,  on  the  whole,  may  well  be  proud  of  her  educational 
system.  It  is  not  perfect,  but  it  is  not  fossilized,  and  is  capable 
of  indefinite  expansion  and  improvement.  That  the  tumult  of 
social  and  spiritual  unrest  should  cease  at  the  door  of  the  school 
could  not  be  expected:  nay,  one  may  wonder  whether  it  would 
be  desirable.  Does  Catholic  education  make  the  moral  division 
of  the  country  irremediable  ?  Would  not  enforced  conformity  to 
some  secular  orthodoxy  be  a  remedy  worse  than  the  evil?  We 
believe  that  both  these  dangers  are  waning.  The  growing 
multiplicity  of  opinions  on  all  subjects  is  making  for  tolerance : 
the  Catholics  are  not  unanimous,  neither  are  the  Freethinkers. 
If  there  were  but  two  parties,  they  would  come  to  blows :  there 
are  twenty,  and  they  must  needs  manage  to  live  side  by  side. 
The  old  ideal  of  dogmatic  unity  must  be  given  up;  but  the 
schools — all  schools — are  slowly  evolving  out  of  this  apparent 
chaos  a  richer  unity,  as  varied  and  as  undefinable  as  life  itself. 

the  term  "  popular  universities  "  was  a  misnomer,  even  to  denote  the  ideal 
which  none  of  these  institutions  realized.  For  the  Furrow  (Sillon),  a 
Catholic  imitation  of  the  Popular  Universities,  cf.  next  chapter. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

F.   BUISSON    (general   editor).     Dictionnaire  de  Pfidagogie.     2  parts  in   4 
vols.     4to.     Hachette,   Paris.     1887-88. 

and  eleven  others.     La  Lutte  Scolaire  en  France  au  XlXeme  siScle. 

xix  +  282  pp.     Alcan,   Paris.     1912. 

L.  LIARD.     L'Enseignement  SupSrieur  en  France,  1789—1889.     2  vols.     8vo. 
474  pp.,  622  pp.     Colin,  Paris.     1888-94. 

Universes  et  Facultfis.     Colin,  Paris.     1890. 

E.  LEVASSEUR.     Histoire  des  Classes  Ouvrifcres,  etc. 

F.  GUIZOT.     M6moires   pour  servir  a   1'Histoire   de  mon  Temps.     8   vols. 

L,6vy,  Paris.     1868-61. 

V.  DURUT.     Notes  et  Souvenirs.     2  vols.     8vo.     Hachette,  Paris.     1901. 
A.  RAMBAUD.     Jules  Ferry.     Plon-Nourrit,  Paris.     1903. 
A.  RIBOT.     EnquSte  de  1899   (Documents  Parlementaires). 
(H.  TAINB.     Origines,  Vol.  XI:  L'Ecole.) 


253 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE 

VH.  EDUCATION 

Plans  for  National  Education  introduced  by — 
1790  Talleyrand;    1792,    Condorcet ;    1792,    Lanthenas;    1793,    Barrere: 

1793,    Lepeletier    de    Saint-Fargeau ;     1793,    Romme;     1793, 

Bouquier;  1794,  Lakanal ;  1795,  Daunou. 
Educational  foundations  of  the  Convention: 

1793  Museum  of  Natural  History. 

1794  Polytechnic  School. 
(Superior)    Normal  School. 

1795  Institute  of  France. 
Central  Schools. 

1803  Creation  of  Lycges   (10  Florfial,  An  X). 
1806-8  Creation  and  organization  of  the  Imperial  University. 

1815  Royer-Collard    and    Guizot   plan   to    create   seventeen   local   Uni- 
versities. 
1824  Ministry  of  Public  Education  becomes  Cabinet  position   (coupled 

with  Ecclesiastical  Affairs). 
Courses  of  Guizot  and  Cousin  suspended. 

1827  Same  reopened.     Brilliant  trio:  Guizot,  Cousin,  Villemain. 

1828  Jesuits'  schools  closed.     Restrictions  on  Lower  Seminaries. 

1830  Liberty  of  Education  promised  by  the  revised  Charter.     Campaign 

of  Lamennais. 

1833  June  22.     Guizot's  Law  organizing  Primary  Education. 
1836  Ordinance  organizing  Primary  Education  for  Girls. 
1838-51  Michelet,  Quinet,  Mickiewicz  at  the  College  de  France. 
1844-45  Campaign  of  liberal  Catholics  against  University  (Montalembert). 

Counter-campaign  against  the  Jesuits. 

1848  Liberty   of  Education   promised  by  the   Constitution.     Hippolyte 
Carnot,  Secretary  of  Education,  plans  compulsory,  gratuitous, 
and  secular  education. 
1850  March    15.     Falloux    Law,    establishing   liberty   of   Primary    and 

Secondary  Education. 
1851-56  Reaction  under  Secretary  Fortoul  (1852,  "bifurcation"). 

1862  Renan  at  the  College  de  France. 
1863-69  Progress  under  Victor  Duruy. 

1865  "  Special  "  Secondary  Education  organized. 

1866  Education  League  authorized   (Jean  Mac6). 

1867  Practical  School  of  Superior  Studies  created. 

1875  July   12.     Liberty   of   Superior   Education    (Catholic   Universities 

created). 

1879-82  Jules  Ferry  and  Paul  Bert.  Superior  Council  of  Public  Education 
reorganized.  Compulsory,  gratuitous,  and  secular  education 
established. 

1880  Secondary  Education  for  Girls  organized. 
1891  "  Modern  "  Secondary  Education. 
254 


EDUCATION  255 


189(5  July  10.     Local  Universities  constituted. 

1899  Great  Inquiry  under  A.  Ribot,  etc.,  leading  to- 

1902  Reorganization  of  Secondary  Education. 

1904  July  7.     Suppression  of  Congregranist  teaching. 


CHAPTER   VIII 
THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION 

§  1.  REACTION,  1800-30. 

§  1.  Reaction,  1800-SO. — The  war  of  the  Church  against  evil;  three 
main  lines  of  conflict — Religious  situation  in  1800 — Reasons  of 
Bonaparte  for  negotiating  the  Concordat — Fosters  Ultramontanism 
— Conflicts  arising  from  the  Concordat — Napoleon  excommunicated 
and  the  Pope  imprisoned. 

Revival  of  Catholicism  in  French  thought  and  literature :  Chateau- 
briand, de  Maistre,  de  Bonald,  Lamennais. 

Alliance  of  the  Church  and  the  Ultra-Catholic  party — Clericalism 
and  anti-clericalism  under  Charles  X. 

THE  Church  is  a  militant  organization  and  her  life  is  war — 
war  against  evil  under  all  its  forms,  suffering,  ignorance,  unbelief, 
and  corruption.  We  should  like  to  dwell  on  this,  the  essential 
side  of  her  activities,  which  even  Catholic  historians  are  apt  to 
neglect.  As  a  charitable  agency  the  Church  is  unrivalled.  In 
the  field  of  education  her  power  is  still  great.  Catholic  missions, 
in  which  France  has  played  a  leading  part,  are  covering  the 
whole  world  with  a  network  of  churches,  schools,  and  hospitals. 
Religious  orders  offer  a  refuge  to  the  world-weary,  the  sorrowful, 
the  mystic,  the  saint.  And  no  fair-minded  observer  could  speak 
without  tender  respect  of  the  daily  life  of  the  Church,  the  humble 
and  sublime  routine  of  parish  duties.  All  this,  and  not  the 
Roman  Curia,  is  the  heart  of  Catholicism  and  the  secret  of  its 
perennial  appeal.  To  whoever  cares  to  see  deeper  into  the  true 
religious  life  of  France,  we  recommend  the  biographies  of  a  few 
typical  Catholics:  Augustin  Cochin,  the  representative  of  what 
is  best  in  the  old,  upright,  cultured,  and  charitable  bourgeoisie ; 
Ozanam,  a  young  scholar  with  the  soul  of  an  apostle;  Father 
J.-B.  Vianney,  the  saintly  village  priest  of  Ars;  Sister  Rosalie, 
whom  the  Paris  poor  have  not  yet  forgotten.  Unfortunately, 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  257 

this  wealth  of  silent  heroism  is  hardly  capable  of  historical  pre- 
sentation. Ours  is  the  task,  a  thankless  one,  of  chronicling  the 
outward,  corporate,  political  life  of  the  Church.  And  this  is 
made  up  of  three  conflicts :  the  struggle  of  faith  against  unbelief, 
or  rather  of  theology  against  science  and  freethought;  the 
struggle  of  authority  against  liberty,  of  theocracy  against 
democracy ;  the  struggle  of  centralization  against  local  autonomy, 
of  Ultramontanism  against  Gallicanism.  To  touch  upon  any  of 
these  points  is  to  probe  wounds  and  inflict  pain:  may  ours  be 
the  callousness  of  the  investigator,  and  not  of  the  tormentor! 
In  the  eyes  of  many  Catholics,  whoever  does  not  fully  agree  with 
the  dominant  party  in  the  Church  is  attacking  religion ;  the  oppo- 
nents of  the  Cardinal  Secretary  of  State  are  the  enemies  of  God. 
It  is  obvious  that  no  impartial  study  of  these  very  puzzling 
problems  is  possible  unless  we  dismiss  once  for  all  such  a 
gratuitous  assumption. 

When  Bonaparte  made  himself  master  of  France  in  1799,  the 
State  professed  to  ignore  all  forms  of  worship  and  tolerated  all. 
Eoman  Catholic  Churches  were  freely  opened.  Religious  perse- 
cution had  ceased:  if  the  Roman  clergy  were  still  treated  with 
suspicion,  it  was  for  purely  political  causes  which  would  have 
disappeared  with  the  restoration  of  order.  The  Constitutional 
Church,  Gallican  and  democratic,  established  by  law  in  1790 
and  salaried  by  the  State  until  1794,  was  still  in  existence  as  an 
independent  organization — a  schismatic  body  in  the  eyes  of  the 
Romanists.  It  was  neither  farcical  nor  negligible,  but  its  vitality 
was  ebbing  fast.  The  "  Culte  Decadaire,"  of  a  purely  civic 
rature,  celebrated  on  the  official  day  of  rest,  the  tenth  day  or 
Decadi,  was  moribund :  its  last  flicker  of  life  was  due  to  the  fact 
that  all  marriages  had  to  be  solemnized  at  the  close  of  its 
ceremonies.  One  new  sect,  Theophilanthropy,  recruited  chiefly 
among  fhe  liberal  bourgeoisie,  was  not  unlike  our  Ethical  Culture 
movement.  'Protestantism,  fully  emancipated  by  the  Revolution, 
was  satisfied  with  the  new  order.  Conditions  were  by  no  means 
ideal :  different  cults  were  compelled  to  share  the  same  buildings, 
and  unseemly  brawls  were  too  often  the  result.  But  it  maybe 
asserted  that  there  existed  no  difficulty  which  a  few  years  of 
liberty  and  tolerance  could  not  have  settled. 


258     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

The  reconstructive  work  of  the  First  Consul,  the  Concordat 
of  1802,  was  therefore  not  indispensable.  France  was  not 
clamouring  for  a  renewal  of  the  old  alliance  between  Church  and 
State.  The  ruling  class  was  still  Voltairian :  Bonaparte  found  it 
no  easy  task  to  reconcile  his  most  intimate  supporters  to  his 
ecclesiastical  policy.  He  was  not  impelled  by  his  own  religious 
sentiments:  although  there  were  in  him  unexpected  touches  of 
mysticism,  he  was  free  from  what  eighteenth-century  philosophy 
called  prejudices.  His  treaty  with  the  Pope  was  the  result  of 
political  considerations. 

First  of  all,  there  was  the  question  of  the  property  confiscated 
from  the  clergy  and  put  up  for  sale  by  the  State.  The  Church 
excommunicated  the  purchasers  of  these  "national  estates," 
even  at  second  and  third  hand.  With  time,  her  threats  and 
protests  would  have  become  innocuous:  meanwhile,  they  were 
still  a  cause  of  hatred  and  strife  among  Frenchmen.  Vendee 
and  Brittany  were  barely  pacified.  Napoleon  thought  he  could 
not  carry  out  his  plan  of  national  reconciliation  without  silencing 
the  opposition  of  the  Church.  This  he  could  do  by  offering  her 
material  and  moral  compensations.  Experience  has  taught  us 
that  he  should  have  limited  himself  to  financial  indemnification 
and  shunned  politico-religious  entanglements.*  However,  the 
temptation  to  resume  the  old  relationship  was  overwhelming. 
The  separation  regime  had  so  far  been  an  accident,  a  truce  due 
to  the  weariness  of  the  combatants:  it  did  not  seem  to  be  a 
permanent  solution.  Napoleon  could  not  conceive  of  such  a 
power  as  the  Catholic  Church  living  and  growing  within  the 
State  and  yet  independent  of  the  State.  Union  or  incessant  war : 
he  saw  no  other  alternative.  Besides,  as  he  himself  said  later, 
with  brutal  openness,  priests  would  provide  him  with  a  ghostly 
police  to  supplement  his  prefects  and  his  gendarmes.  He  was 
already  haunted  by  dreams  of  monarchical  restoration:  the 
King  of  France  was  the  Lord's  anointed;  his  successor  would 
remain  a  usurper  until  he  secured  the  goodwill  of  the  Church. 
A  Concordat  would  take  from  Louis  XVIII  his  trump  card. 
Finally,  Napoleon  was  conscious  of  a  reaction  in  favour  of 

*  In  1825  the  nobles  who  had  suffered  from  the  Revolution  received 
money,  but  feudalism  was  not  restored. 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  259 

religion,  and  it  was  his  instinctive  policy  to  capture  and  canalize 
every  important  movement,  so  as  to  use  it  for  his  own  ends  and 
claim  the  largest  share  of  profit  and  praise. 

The  Concordat,  signed  in  Eome  in  August,  1801,  and  not 
promulgated  in  Paris  until  April,  1802,  secured  to  the  State  the 
following  advantages:  the  owners  of  former  Church  property 
would  be  left  in  quiet  possession ;  there  would  be  a  new  delimita- 
tion of  French  bishoprics,  their  number  being  greatly  reduced ; 
all  existing  bishops,  whether  Eomanist  or  Constitutional,  would 
be  requested  to  resign;  the  members  of  the  new  episcopate  and 
their  successors  were  to  be  nominated  by  the  First  Consul  and 
confirmed  by  the  Pope;  parish  priests  (cures)  were  to  be 
appointed  by  the  bishops,  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  First 
Consul.  Bishops  and  priests  would  have  to  take  an  oath  of 
fidelity  and  obedience  to  the  First  Consul,  and  to  promise  that 
they  would  denounce  any  plot  and  conspiracy  that  might  come  to 
their  knowledge.  The  First  Consul  would  enjoy  all  the  preroga- 
tives and  privileges  of  the  kings  his  predecessors. 

Pius  VII  had  thus  shown  himself  much  more  tractable  than 
Pius  VI ;  for  these  concessions  were  as  radical  as  those  required 
by  the  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy  in  1791,  and  so  indig- 
nantly refused  by  the  Holy  See.  The  compensations,  it  is  true, 
were  considerable.  Catholicism,  so  recently  under  the  ban, 
was  recognized  as  the  religion  of  the  majority  of  the  French, 
and  particularly  of  the  Consuls  themselves.  The  Constitutional 
schism  was  ended  by  a  compromise;  ten  of  its  prelates  became 
Roman  Catholic  bishops.  Feeble  as  it  was,  this  national  and 
reformed  organization  might  have  proved  a  permanent  rallying- 
point  for  the  opponents  of  papal  encroachments.  Finally, 
bishops  and  priests  received  stipends,  on  a  fairly  liberal  scale, 
from  the  Government. 

All  considered,  one  may  seriously  wonder  whether  the  Church 
was  not  bartering  away  precious  liberties  for  doubtful  privileges. 
What  tempted  and  decided  the  Pope  was  the  unhoped-for 
increase  of  authority  that  the  Concordat  gave  him  over  the 
Gallican  Church.  For  the  Roman  Pontiff  to  dispose  of  French 
property  as  if  it  were  his  own  was  unheard  of  in  a  land  hitherto 
so  jealous  of  her  ecclesiastical  autonomy.  His  requesting  all 


260     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

French  bishops  to  resign  was  tantamount  to  the  assumption  of 
absolute  power.  The  French  clergy  gained  something  in  wealth 
and  prestige  by  the  Concordat:  but  Eome  was  enormously 
strengthened.* 

This  was  certainly  not  what  Napoleon  had  in  mind.  He 
wanted  to  subject  the  whole  Church  to  the  authority  of  the  Pope 
because  he  thought  that  the  Pope  would  be  a  convenient  tool  in 
his  hand.  He  hoped  to  be  a  new  Constantine,  a  masterful  bene- 
factor whom  the  Church  could  not  afford  to  displease.  He  had 
failed  to  gauge  the  spiritual  power  of  that  petty  Italian  prince 
whom  a  mere  detachment  from  the  French  army  could  coerce 
into  submission.  He  considered  the  Pope  as  a  vassal,  almost  as 
a  dependent.  He  did  not  mean  to  give  up  a  single  one  of  the 
old  Gallican  claims :  indeed,  with  the  Concordat  he  promulgated 
so-called  "Organic  Articles,"  which  strictly  limited  the  rights 
of  the  Pope  in  France  and  made  the  Gallican  declaration  of 
1682  the  official  doctrine  of  all  theological  seminaries.  Rome 
protested  at  once  against  this  unilateral  addition  to  a  formal 
treaty:  Napoleon  and  his  successors  maintained  that  they  were 
strictly  within  the  bounds  of  their  traditional  powers  of  legislation 
in  ecclesiastical  matters.  Hence  a  conflict  which  was  to  last  as 
long  as  the  Concordat  itself. 

The  future  was  with  Rome,  not  with  Gallicanism.  When  the 
king  was  the  legitimate  successor  of  Clovis  and  the  descendant 
of  Saint  Louis,  anointed  with  holy  chrism  which  a  mystic  dove 
had  brought  down  from  heaven,  endowed  with  miraculous  heal- 
ing powers,  his  authority  might  balance  that  of  the  Pope  himself. 
But  a  Corsican  usurper,  or  a  Voltairian  Citizen  King,  even  a 
sceptical  and  constitutional  Louis  XVIII,  had  no  spiritual 
glamour  about  him,  and  his  word  counted  for  little  in  Church 
affairs. 

But  there  were  other  ambiguities  in  the  Concordat.  What, 
for  instance,  was  to  be  the  status  of  the  religious  orders  sup- 


•  No  fewer  than  forty  prelates  refused  to  obey :  they  were  deposed,  but 
they  still  considered  themselves  as  the  sole  legitimate  representatives  of 
the  Catholic  Church  in  France;  the  last  of  them  died  in  1828,  and  the 
"  Petite  Kglise,"  as  it  was  called,  did  not  disappear  until  the  last  decade 
of  the  nineteenth  century. 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  261 

pressed  by  the  Revolution?  Were  the  salaries  paid  to  the 
clergy  the  remuneration  of  a  public  service  or  a  compensation,  as 
Church  historians  and  jurists  occasionally  maintain,  for  their 
property  confiscated  in  1791?  Had  the  Government  the  right 
of  appointing  or  merely  of  nominating  bishops  ?  These  important 
problems  remained  unsettled. 

The  Concordat  was  therefore  a  mistake:  Napoleon  himself 
came  to  consider  it  as  the  worst  blunder  in  his  career.  The 
Pope  was  brought  to  Paris,  to  grace  with  his  presence  the  self- 
coronation  of  the  new  Charlemagne.  But,  immediately  after  this 
brilliant  ceremomr,  difficulties  began  between  the  Sacerdoce  and 
the  Empire.  In  his  ruthless  way,  Napoleon  annexed  piece  after 
piece  of  the  Pope's  dominion,  until  in  1809  Rome  itself  became 
a  French  city.  The  Pontiff,  dangerously  sick,  was  hurriedly 
taken  to  Savona,  thence  to  Fontainebleau,  and  kept  in  strict 
confinement.  The  papal  archives  were  brought  to  Paris — the 
new  Rome.  Thirteen  cardinals  who,  out  of  sympathy  with 
Pius  VII,  had  refused  to  attend  the  second  marriage  of 
Napoleon,  were  deprived  of  their  insignia  and  scattered  in 
provincial  towns  under  police  supervision.  Meanwhile  the  Pope 
had  secretly  excommunicated  the  Emperor,  and  refused  to  con- 
firm the  Bishops  appointed  by  him.  A  Council  was  summoned 
in  Paris  to  cope  with  this  situation  (1811).  As  it  proved 
intractable,  Napoleon  dismissed  it;  but,  by  threats  or  promises, 
he  secured  the  individual  adhesion  of  a  majority  of  French 
prelates  to  some  modus  vivendi.  In  1813,  at  last,  returning 
defeated  from  Russia,  he  negotiated  directly  with  Pius,  in 
dramatically  mysterious  interviews,  a  new  Concordat  which  the 
wavering  and  ailing  Pope  accepted  in  January,  only  to  retract 
two  months  later.  1814  brought  deliverance  to  the  Pontiff,  to 
whom,  his  possessions  were  restored.  Such  had  been  the 
immediate  fruits  of  the  Concordat. 

BonaparteVpolicy  was  powerless  either  to  foster  or  to  check 
the  revival  of  Catholicism.  This  great  movement  was  due  to 
much  deeper  causes.  A  century  of  dry  materialism  and  scoffing 
scepticism,  ten  years  of  revolution,  had  brought  about  a  revulsion 
of  feelings.  Sentiment  and  imagination  were  restored  to  their 
rightful  place  in  the  spiritual  world.  Logic  was  discounted. 


262     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXrn  CENTURY 

Hvi 

In  all  this  we  can  trace  the  influence  of  Eousseau,  the  pioneer  of 
reaction  as  well  as  of  revolution.  Authority  and  tradition  had 
long  been  known  exclusively  through  their  abuses;  now  they  lay 
shattered,  and  their  services  were  remembered.  A  poignant 
melancholy  rose  from  their  ruins,  which  pious  hands  sought  to 
restore.  This  was  the  work  of  Chateaubriand.  His  Genie  du 
Christianisme  is  an  event  in  the  history  of  culture.  It  came 
exactly  at  the  right  time,  and  expressed  with  poetical  eloquence 
the  aspirations  of  the  new  era.  There  was  much  Eomantic  self- 
delusion  and  shallow  sentimentalism  in  the  assumed  orthodoxy 
of  Chateaubriand.  It  led  most  of  his  disciples  into  unbelief  or 
even  into  morbidity.  But  for  a  quarter  of  a  century  it  was  a 
most  powerful  factor.  All  the  great  poets  of  the  following 
generation,  Lamartine,  Hugo,  Vigny,  were  for  many  years 
professed  Catholics;  echoes  of  the  Genie  du  Christianisme  are 
found,  altered  yet  unmistakable,  in  Michelet's  History  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  and  even  in  Kenan's  works,  But  Chateaubriand 
with  his  aesthetic  and  sentimental  religiosity  was  by  no  means 
the  sole  advocate  of  Catholicism.  De  Bonald,  de  Maistre, 
Lamennais  were  preaching  with  less  charm  a  severer  doctrine, 
the  gospel  of  authority.  De  Maistre,  in  particular,  taught  that 
a  divinely  ordained  spiritual  power  alone  could  give  the  world 
order,  peace,  harmony — and  this  power  he  could  find  nowhere  but 
in  the  eternal  Church  guided  by  an  infallible  Pope  (Du  Pape, 
1819).  Absolutism  under  the  monition  of  theocracy:  such  was 
the  ideal  of  this  thorough  and  inspiring  reactionist,  whom  Bal- 
lanche  called  a  "  Prophet  of  the  Past."  Gallicanism  now  meant 
a  compromise  with  the  constitutional  civil  authorities  issued  of  the 
Revolution :  this  thought  both  de  Maistre  and  Lamennais  abhorred. 

Thus  was  naturally  sealed  the  alliance,  in  the  Ultra-royalist 
party,  between  political  and  religious  reaction.  The  same  men 
wanted  to  restore  the  rights  and  privileges  of  the  nobility  and  of 
the  Church :  for  them  the  cause  of  monarchy  by  divine  right 
and  that  of  Catholicism  were  inseparable :  the  "  throne  and  the 
altar"  should  stand  or  fall  together.  This  alliance  has 
affected  the  life  of  the  Church  throughout  the  nineteenth  century. 

Under  the  Restoration,  the  Church  party  did  not  discourage 
the  outbreak  of  violence  known  as  the  White  Terror,  and  the 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  263 

"  Missions/'  instead  of  fostering  a  purely  spiritual  revival,  were 
crusades  against  the  ideas  and  the  institutions  of  the  modern 
regime.  Strict  was  the  censorship  of  the  Press  whenever  religion 
was  concerned.  Sunday  rest  ordinances  were  rigidly  enforced. 
Public  education  was  placed  under  the  control  of  the  clergy, 
and  sacrilege  was  punishable  with  death. 

But  the  liberal,  anti-clerical  opposition  was  not  powerless.  It 
was  composed,  not  only  of  materialists  and  Voltairians,  but 
chiefly  of  reasonable  Catholics  attached  to  the  traditions  of  the 
Galilean  Church.  The  law  on  sacrilege,  which  created  a  great 
stir,  was  never  applied.  A  new  Concordat,  negotiated  with  the 
Pope  in  1817,  was  received  with  such  hostility  by  public  opinion 
that  the  Ministry  thought  it  wiser  to  let  the  matter  drop.  The 
"  Organic  Articles "  were  not  repealed.  The  one  permanent 
advantage  the  Church  obtained  was  the  creation  of  several  new 
bishoprics  in  1821. 

Under  Charles  X  the  struggle  became  sharper.  The  new- 
King,  atoning  for  a  dissipated  youth,  was  a  bigoted  Catholic. 
His  coronation  at  Rheims  seemed  to  revive  old  theocratic  claims. 
He  and  his  most  intimate  advisers  were  supposed  to  be  in  the 
hands  of  a  mysterious  "  Congregation "  which  governed  the 
State  for  the  best  interests  of  the  Church.  The  dreaded 
Jesuits  had  returned  as  Paccanarists  and  Fathers  of  the  Faith. 
This  aggressive  move  of  clericalism  brought  about  a  revival  of 
Voltairianism.  It  was  the  time  of  Courier's  pamphlets,  of 
Beranger's  most  biting  satirical  songs.  Several  popular  editions 
of  Voltaire  were  published.  Montlosier,  a  gentleman  of  the  old 
school,  an  ardent  defender  of  feudalism  and  Gallicanism,  de- 
nounced the  Jesuits  with  extreme  violence,  and  at  his  instigation 
the  Courts  reaffirmed  that  the  famous  Order  could  have  no  legal 
existence  in  France.  The  conflict  which  led  to  the  ordinances  and 
to  the  Revolution  of  July,  1830,  was  a  religious  as  well  as  a  con- 
stitutional one.  For  a  few  months  it  was  hardly  safe  for  a  priest 
to  venture  in  the  streets  of  Paris  in  his  clerical  garb.  The 
Archbishop's  palace  was  sacked  by  the  mob.  The  same  fate 
befell  the  Church  of  St.  Germain-l'Auxerrois,  for  the  sole 
reason  that  Legitimists  had  gathered  there  for  a  memorial 
service.  The  coronation  of  Louis-Philippe  was  performed 


264     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

with  great  simplicity,  almost  shamefacedly.  It  seemed  as 
though  Catholicism  had  been  exiled  with  the  last  of  the  old 
Bourbons. 


§  2.  THE  GREAT  SCHISM,  1830-70. 

I  2.  The  Great  Schism,  1830-70. — 1830:  Liberal  Catholicism — Failure 
of  Lamennais — Lacordaire  at  Notre-Dame — Montalembert  in  the 
House  of  Peers — Attacks  against  the  University  and  counter-attack 
against  the  Jesuits — Conversion  of  the  great  Romanticists  to  hu- 
manitarianism. 

1848 :  Temporary  reconciliation  between  the  Church  and  democ- 
racy— Immediate  rupture — The  Roman  expedition  at  home — The 
coup  d'etat  endorsed  by  the  Catholics — Slow  agony  of  liberal  Cathol- 
icism— Uncompromising  policy  of  Pius  IX — The  Syllabus — Papal 
Infallibility. 

But  there  were  still  treasures  of  spiritual  life  in  France,  and 
even  in  Catholicism.  Lamennais,  a  conservative  theologian, 
in  his  Essay  on  Indifference,  understood  the  lesson  so  sharply 
inflicted.  The  modern  world  was  based  on  liberty;  could 
not  the  Church  frankly  accept  this  principle,  at  least  in  her 
relations  with  the  State  and  with  society?  Would  she  not 
gain  more  through  liberty  than  through  the  protection  of  a 
secular  sovereign  like  Charles  X?  Absolutism  was  dead;  the 
Church  herself  could  not  become  democratic,  but  could  she  not 
Christianize  democracy?  Such  was  the  bold  change  of  front 
which  Lamennais  advocated  in  his  newspaper  L'Avenir  (The 
Future),  supported  by  two  brilliant  young  men,  Montalembert 
and  Lacordaire.  Liberalism  is  the  constant  refuge  of  defeated 
minorities;  but  the  attitude  of  these  men  was  the  result  of  a 
sincere  conversion  rather  than  a  tactical  move.  Turning  the 
tables  against  the  new  Government,  they  asked  at  once  for  a 
liberty  promised  by  the  revised  charter :  the  liberty  of  education. 
They  even  founded  an  independent  school.  Now  that  the  Vol- 
tairians were  in  control,  they  were  reluctant  to  give  up  the 
State's  teaching  monopoly,  and  the  pledge  of  1830  was  not 
redeemed.  The  school  of  The  Future  was  closed  by  the 
police  and  its  founders  prosecuted.  Thus  did  the  State  welcome 
the  liberal  Catholics. 

On  the  other  hand,  Lamennais  and  his  friends   were  not 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  265 

heartily  supported  by  their  co-religionists.  The  old  aristocratic 
families  were  still  the  mainstay  of  the  Church;  congenitally 
unable  to  understand  a  new  departure,  they  were  horrified  at 
the  very  name  of  liberty.  Although  the  new  movement  was 
conservative  in  theology  and  respectful  of  the  Eoman  hier- 
archy, timid  souls  shrank  from  it  as  if  it  were  heretical. 
The  publication  of  The  Future  had  to  be  suspended,  and 
the  three  daring  Catholics  repaired  to  Rome  to  plead  their 
cause. 

But  in  1831  a  reactionary  pontiff,  Gregory  XVI,  had  been 
elected.  In  August,  1832,  he  issued  an  encyclical  letter,  Mirari 
Vosf  in  which  liberalism  was  condemned  root  and  branch, 
freedom  of  thought,  or  democracy  within  the  Church,  the 
liberals  had  never  advocated.  But  they  were  in  favour  of  the 
separation  of  Church  and  State,  and,  as  they  claimed  for  them- 
selves the  right  to  believe,  they  wanted  to  respect  in  others  the 
right  not  to  believe.  This  was  denounced  by  the  Pope  as  an 
"absurd  and  erroneous  opinion,  or  rather  a  piece  of  folly," 
springing  from  "  the  fetid  source  of  indifferentism."  Lamen- 
nais  hesitated  for  a  while,  his  passionate  soul  torn  by  a  tragic 
conflict.  After  some  velleities  of  submission  he  left  the  Church. 
We  shall  find  him  later  in  his  third  avatar,  as  the  prophet  of 
anti-clerical  and  democratic  Christianity. 

His  two  friends,  Lacordaire  and  Montalembert,  after  a  few 
years  of  silent  discouragement,  resumed  their  activities,  but  with 
greater  prudence.  Lacordaire  was  a  brilliant  orator.  Faithful 
to  his  principle  of  modernizing  the  methods  of  the  Church, 
he  gave  at  Notre-Dame,  from  1835  onward,  several  series  of 
lectures  on  the  burning  questions  of  the  times.  He  was 
sonorous  rather  than  profound,  but  his  romantic  eloquence  found 
a  readj  echo  among  the  young  generation,  and  the  effect  was 
heightened  when  he  assumed  the  white  robe  of  a  Dominican 
friar.  He  helped  to  revive  in  many  hearts  the  poetic  religiosity 
heralded  by  Chateaubriand.  To  any  deeper  influence  he  has 
no  claim. 

Montalembert's  liberalism  was  quite  different  from  the  vague, 
v/arm-hearted,  popular  tendency  found  in  Lacordaire.  It  was 
of  a  narrower,  parliamentary  and  aristocratic  nature,  somewhat 


266     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

un-French,  and  probably  due  to  the  man's  English  ancestry  and 
education.  He  happened  to  come  into  his  title  just  before 
the  heredity  of  the  peerage  was  abolished;  in  the  Upper  House 
he  found  himself,  while  still  very  young,  the  respected  leader  of 
the  Catholic  party.  He  limited  his  efforts  to  the  one  point  in 
which  the  interests  of  the  Church  were  at  one  with  those  of 
liberty:  he  renewed  the  campaign  of  The  Future  against  the 
State  monopoly  of  education.  He  and  Veuillot  led  the  attack 
with  such  bitterness  that  even  his  former  associate,  Lacordaire, 
felt  obliged  to  sound  a  note  of  warning.  Voltairianism  was 
thrown  upon  the  defensive.  As  usual,  the  efforts  of  the  Church 
party  roused  a  new  wave  of  anti-clericalism,  and,  as  usual 
again,  the  first  victims  were  the  Jesuits,  the  chief  educational 
power  and  the  aggressive  vanguard  of  Catholicism.  Libri, 
Genin,  took  up  the  cudgels  against  them.*  The  great  Komantic 
and  democratic  historians,  Quinet  and  Michelet,  gave  and  pub- 
lished a  series  of  anti-clerical  lectures.!  Eugene  Sue  wrote  his 
long-popular  romance,  The  Wandering  Jew,  one  of  the  most 
widely  read  and  most  influential  books  of  the  century,  in  which 
a  Jesuit,  Rodin,  plays  the  part  of  the  villain.  Villemain's  dread 
of  the  Jesuits  became  a  mental  disease  which  interrupted  his 
career.  The  Government  could  no  longer  ignore  the  presence 
of  these  embarrassing  Fathers:  the  number  of  their  colleges  was 
increasing;  one  of  them,  Ravignan,  had  taken  the  succession  of 
Lacordaire  at  Notre-Dame,  and  they  were  denounced  on  every 
hand.  But  Guizot  did  not  share  the  popular  prejudice  against 
the  famous  Society.  A  conservative  Protestant  in  open  sym- 
pathy with  Kome,  and  a  friend  of  Metternich,  he  represented 
admirably  that  section  of  the  bourgeoisie  which,  since  1830, 
had  abjured  revolutionary  ideas  and  was  ready  to  strike  an 
alliance  with  the  Church.  So,  compelled  to  "  do  something," 
he  sent  to  Rome  a  brilliant  economist  and  statesman  of  cos- 
mopolitan experience,  Count  Rossi,  and  tried  to  secure  through 
the  Pope  the  voluntary  withdrawal  of  the  Jesuits.  A  little 
comedy  with  which  all  Frenchmen  are  familiar  was  then  per- 

•  Lea  JeauUea  et  VUniveraite,  1844. 

jLea  Jilauitea,  jointly,  1848;  Quinet,  L'Ultramontaniame,  1844;  Michelet, 
Du  Pretrc,  de  la  Femme  et  de  la  Famille,  1846. 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  267 

formed;  a  few  colleges  were  closed,  and  soon  reopened  under 
a  different  name.  The  eighteen  years  of  the  July  monarchy 
were  thus  a  time  of  covert  and  undecisive  hostility  between 
the  liberal  forces  in  the  lay  State  and  the  Koman  clergy. 

But  during  that  period  a  great  revolution  took  place,  the 
consequences  of  which  are  not  yet  fully  realized  beyond  the 
borders  of  France.  It  may  be  said  that  the  main  current  of 
religious  thought  ceased  to  flow  in  the  traditional  channel. 
Those  years  of  romanticism  and  Utopian  socialism  were  full 
of  spiritual  life :  "  France  was  big  with  Messianic  hopes." 
These  undisciplined  aspirations  assumed  forms  which  may  seem 
to  us  grotesque  enough,  like  the  synthetic  "Evadism"  of  the 
gentle  lunatic  who  called  himself  the  Mapah.  But  the  New 
Christianity  of  the  Saiut-Simonians,  in  spite  of  its  ludicrous 
sides,  was  a  powerful  movement  which  illumined  for  a  few 
mouths  the  lives  of  strong  men,  and  the  memory  of  which 
remained  sacred  to  them  after  thirty  years  of  practical  activities. 
No  unconquerable  prophet  appeared,  no  Church  was  permanently 
established.  But  there  prevailed  a  certain  spirit  which,  in 
another  work,  we  have  ventured  to  define  as  "Romantic 
Humanitarianism."  Its  keynote  was  love — love  and  pity  for 
the  oppressed,  for  the  poor,  for  the  fallen  woman,  for  the  sinner, 
for  Satan  himself.  Universal  love  means  universal  brotherhood : 
mankind  is  actually  one,  the  collective  incarnation  of  the 
divine,  the  growing  realization  of  the  immanent  God.  Of  this 
incarnation  Christ  was  the  most  perfect  type  and  the  supreme 
symbol.  The  service  of  mankind  is  then  the  essence  of  religion : 
democracy  and  socialism,  with  their  mystic  connotation,  are 
true  Christianity.  This  creed  is  nowhere  expressed  with  finality : 
we  find  it  implied  in  scores  of  books,  in  Pierre  Leroux's  De 
I'Hunyinite,  or  in  the  last  published  works  of  the  Saint-Simonians, 
Father  Enfantin  and  Barrault.  But  the  gospel  of  the  new 
faith,  without  a  trace  of  dogmatic  theology,  is  Lamennais's 
brief  biblical  pastiche,  Words  of  a  Believer.  With  its 
verses  full  of  tenderest  pity  and  burning  wrath,  this  book 
had  a  powerful  influence.  It  was  chiefly  through  Lamennais 
— although  many  other  agencies  were  at  work — that  the 
greatest  writers  of  the  day — Hugo,  Lamartine,  Michelet,  George 


268     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

Sand,  even  Vigny — were  converted  to  some  form  of  mystic 
humanitarianism. 

There  we  have  the  great  schism  in  the  religious  life  of  France : 
on  the  one  hand  pessimistic  supernaturalism,  which  holds  that 
man  is  corrupt  and  cannot  be  saved  except  through  the  grace 
of  a  transcendent  God;  on  the  other,  optimistic  naturalism, 
which  believes  that  human  instincts,  human  reason,  are  not 
deceptive,  that  God  is  in  everything,  and  therefore  that  the 
universe  must  be  progressing  towards  the  light.  These  two 
antinomic  conceptions  are  curiously  blended  in  the  faith  of  most 
orthodox  Christians:  they  are  by  no  means  radically  separated 
even  in  France.  But,  on  the  whole,  Catholicism  insists  on  the 
Fall  and  redemption  through  the  historic  Christ,  whose  powers 
are  vested  in  His  Church;  it  stands  for  the  repression  of  evil 
by  an  authority  from  above,  whose  rights  are  established  by 
tradition.  It  is  a  doctrine  of  discipline  and  conservation. 
Humanitarianism  insists  on  progress  through  the  expansion  of 
forces  within  mankind,  through  the  spirit  of  the  immanent 
Christ.  It  is  a  doctrine  of  emancipation,  of  growth,  and  looks 
towards  the  future  as  orthodox  Christianity  looks  towards 
the  past. 

Now,  although  pessimistic  supernaturalism  may  have  a  more 
tonic  effect  upon  the  individual  soul,  optimistic  naturalism  is  at 
the  basis  of  every  social  improvement.  The  chief  paradox  of  the 
situation  is  this :  the  Church,  resting  on  authority  and  tradition, 
defends  the  established  order,  and  therefore  sides  with  the  rich 
and  the  powerful:  so  the  greatest  spiritual  power  is  not  free 
from  the  taint  of  materialism.  The  humanitarians,  on  the  other 
hand,  whose  philosophy  is  too  often  materialistic,  are  fighting 
for  what  they  hold  to  be  justice  and  truth,  in  a  spirit  of  brother- 
hood and  hope,  and  are  thus  the  true  idealists,  the  true  followers 
of  Christ.  The  struggle  of  the  Church  against  the  Revolution 
is  not  a  clear  conflict  of  right  and  wrong,  but  a  many-sided, 
puzzling  warfare,  in  which  sympathies  cannot  go  unreservedly  to 
either  side. 

In  1848  it  seemed  as  though  Catholicism  and  humanitarian- 
ism were  to  be  reconciled.  Pope  Pius  IX,  elected  two  years 
previously,  was  thought  to  be  a  true  democrat.  The  Church 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  269 

and  the  people  had  both  hailed  with  delight  the  fall  of  the 
Voltairian  bourgeoisie.  The  Revolutionists  were  fond  of  claiming 
Christ  as  their  Master.  The  clergy  blessed  the  trees  of  liberty. 
Abbe  Henry  Maret  started  a  democratic  paper,  aptly  called  The 
New  Era,  in  which  he  received  the  support  of  Ozanam  and 
Lacordaire.  The  great  Dominican  orator  himself  was  sent  to 
the  Constituent  Assembly. 

But  within  a  few  months  the  old  antinomy  reappeared. 
Lacordaire  soon  grew  discouraged  and  resigned  his  seat. 
Montalembert  censured  the  Christian  phraseology  of  the  Revo- 
lutionists as  sacrilegious.  The  New  Era  was  bought  over  and 
summarily  "  strangled "  by  a  Legitimist  Catholic,  La  Roche- 
jacquelein.  The  Days  of  June  frightened  the  upper  and 
middle  classes  into  reaction — i.e.,  into  clericalism  and  ultra- 
montanism.  The  death  of  Archbishop  Affre  on  his  mission  of 
peace  to  the  barricades  was  the  symbol  of  an  irreparable  breach 
between  the  Church  and  the  Revolution.  At  the  same  time, 
Pius  IX  was  driven  from  Rome  by  an  uprising  of  the  people, 
and  when,  in  1849,  he  was  restored  by  a  French  army,  he 
became  the  unrelenting  foe  of  every  modern  idea.  A  "  Roman 
expedition  at  home,"  a  campaign  of  political  and  social  reaction, 
was  carried  on  by  the  French  conservatives  in  the  name  of 
religion.  The  Falloux  law  was  meant  to  break  down  the  State's 
educational  monopoly  for  the  sole  benefit  of  the  Church.  The 
coup  d'etat  of  December,  1851,  which  "  saved  society "  from 
a  return  of  the  democrats  to  power,  was  endorsed,  with  some 
reluctance,  by  Montalembert,  and  with  lyric  enthusiasm  by 
Louis  Veuillot. 

The  twenty-two  years  during  which  Louis-Napoleon  was  the 
ruler  of  France,  as  President  or  as  Emperor,  are  a  critical  period 
in  the^  history  of  French  thought.  Catholicism  hardened  in  its 
policy  of  resistance  to  progress.  For  ten  years  it  reaped  the 
material  benefit  of  its  alliance  with  autocracy.  Honours,  influ- 
ence, money  were  showered  on  the  clergy.  French  cardinals 
were  by  right  members  of  the  Senate.  Education  was  entirely 
under  the  supervision  of  the  priests,  although  not  under  their 
immediate  control.  Religious  orders  were  allowed  to  multiply. 
In  Paris,  and  all  the  great  cities,  magnificent  churches  were 


270     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

built.  But  in  1859  the  Emperor's  Italian  policy  jeopardized 
the  Pope's  temporal  dominion,  and  Napoleon  III  thus  forfeited 
the  support  of  the  Catholics. 

Liberal  Catholicism  was  slowly  dying.  Lacordaire  was  silent, 
devoting  all  his  energy  to  his  college  of  Soreze;  but  in  his 
letters  to  Madame  Swetchine  he  did  not  conceal  his  disgust  with 
the  mean-hearted  and  short-sighted  policy  of  the  Ultramontanes. 
Montalembert,  Dupanloup,  Gratry,  Hello  were  praised  whenever 
they  attacked  freethought  and  democracy;  but  their  slightest 
velleities  of  independence  were  immediately  denounced  and 
rebuked.  Father  Hyacinthe  Loyson,  an  orator  full  of  generous 
sympathies,  was  gradually  pushed  to  the  verge  of  secession. 
Louis  Veuillot,  a  journalist  of  humble  origin,  talented  and  sin- 
cere, but  narrow,  violent,  and  coarse,  was  the  chief  power  within 
French  Catholicism. 

The  last  traces  of  Gallicanism  were  also  vanishing.  The 
unifying,  centralizing  policy  of  Eome  was  progressing  unchecked. 
As  the  Pope's  temporal  power  was  melting  away,  his  spiritual 
authority  steadily  increased.  Thus  he  was  able,  in  1854,  to 
proclaim  of  his  own  authority,  and  without  convening  a  Council, 
the  dogma  of  the  Immaculate  Conception.  In  1864  he  boldly 
threw  the  gauntlet  to  modern  thought  in  his  encyclical  Quanta 
Cum  and  his  Syllabus,  or  catalogue  of  errors  condemned  by 
Rome.  In  spite  of  all  the  subtle  explanations  of  Mgr.  Dupan- 
loup, the  lay  world  understood  in  their  literal  sense  these 
famous  documents,  which  ended  with  the  proposition :  "  Anathema 
on  him  who  should  maintain:  that  the  Roman  Pontiff  can  and 
must  be  reconciled  and  compromise  with  progress,  liberalism, 
and  modern  civilization!"  Finally,  in  1870  Pius  IX  had  the 
dogma  of  Papal  Infallibility  defined  by  the  Vatican  Council.  A 
few  days  after  this  supreme  triumph  of  ultramontanism  the 
Franco-German  War  broke  out,  the  Empire  fell,  the  French 
troops  were  hastily  recalled  from  Rome,  and  on  the  20th  of 
September  the  army  of  Victor-Emmanuel  entered  the  Eternal 
City.  History  offers  few  more  dramatic  contrasts. 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  271 


§  3.  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC. 

Religious  revival  after  the  war — Checked  by  clerical  and  political 
Intrigues — Anti-clericalism  and  the  16th  of  May — Anti-clericalism 
and  the  school  question — Leo  XIII  and  the  policy  of  reconciliation 
with  the  modern  world — The  "  Rallies  "  and  the  "  New  Spirit " — The 
Dreyfus  case  and  religion — Anti-clerical  legislation  of  Waldeck- 
Rousseau — Emile  Combes  (Note  on  Freemasonry) — The  Concordat 
breaks  down — Rupture — The  Separation  law — Hostility  to  the 
Separation  due  to  the  Roman  Curia. 

§  4.  Modernism. — Gratry  and  Maret,  forgotten  forerunners — Re- 
vival of  Catholic  thought  and  sentiment  in  the  nineties — Vagueness 
of  the  Modernist  attitude — Encyclical  Pascendi — Christian  democ- 
racy: Abbe  Lemire — Marc  Sangnier  and  the  "Furrow"  (Note  on 
Count  de  Mun's  social  activities). 


After  the  war  and  the  Commune,  Catholicism  had  an  admirable 
chance.  France  was  humbled  in  her  pride  and,  one  might  say, 
penitent.  There  was  a  genuine  return  to  religion,  symbolized 
by  the  two  votive  churches  which  rose  on  the  heights  of 
Fourvieres  and  Montmartre  like  citadels  of  prayer  protecting 
the  cities  of  Lyons  and  Paris.  France  was  groping  for  Chris- 
tianity: she  found  again  clericalism  and  ultramontanism.  The 
priests  wanted  her,  bleeding  still,  to  reconquer  Rome  for  the 
Pope.  The  old  alliance  between  the  Church  and  political  re- 
action was  as  evident  as  ever.  The  Government  of  Moral  Order 
and  the  half-hearted  coup  d'etat  of  the  16th  of  May  were 
supported  by  the  rank  and  file  of  the  Catholics.  Hence 
Gambetta's  war-cry,  which  was  to  re-echo  throughout  the 
history  of  the  Third  Republic :  "  Clericalism  is  the  enemy !  " 

The  defeat  of  the  Monarchists  at  the  polls  in  1877  was  a 
disaster  for  the  Church.  As  soon  as  the  Republicans  were  in 
full  control  of  the  government  they  introduced  anti-clerical  legis- 
lation. The  repeal  of  the  Concordat  had  long  been  an  article 
of  the  Radical  programme.  But  the  Opportunists  shrank  from 
such  a  bold  experiment  for  fear  that  the  young  Republic  should 
not  prove  equal  to  the  strain.  It  was  understood  that  separation 
would  mean  civil  war.  From  1879  to  1905  Church  and  State 
were  united  like  two  well-matched  adversaries  who  dare  not  let 
go  their  hold  of  each  other  for  a  moment. 

We  have  seen  how  the  educational  problem  was  embittered  by 


272     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

the  clerical  question.  In  1880  a  certain  number  of  monasteries, 
convents,  and  Jesuit  schools  were  closed  manu  militari,  after  a 
show  of  resistance.  As  usual,  they  were  reopened  as  soon  as 
the  crisis  was  over. 

"  Neutrality "  in  the  State  schools  was  denounced  as  thinly 
veiled  atheism,  although  Jules  Simon,  a  spiritualist  philosopher, 
had  made  the  existence  of  God  the  basis  of  moral  education. 
Nuns  and  the  Brothers  of  the  Christian  Doctrine  had  charge  of 
the  public  schools  in  many  districts :  the  new  laws  provided  that 
all  sectarian  elements  should  gradually  be  eliminated.  Great 
was  the  bitterness  on  both  sides.  Devoted  men  and  women  were 
driven  from  country  schools — as  well  as  from  hospitals — even 
when  the  local  population  wanted  to  keep  them.  On  the  other 
hand,  lay  teachers  in  remote  parts  were  too  often  the  victims  of 
social  ostracism  and  even  of  cowardly  violence.  No  wonder  then 
that  in  many  places  the  schoolmaster  has  assumed,  or  been 
driven  to  assume,  the  position  of  "  anti-priest."  * 

Pius  IX  died  in  1878,  after  a  reign  of  unparalleled  duration 
and  importance.  His  successor,  Leo  XIII,  was  by  no  means  a 
radical  reformer.  The  Syllabus  and  Papal  Infallibility  remained 
the  law  of  the  Church,  and  the  protest  against  the  Italian 
occupation  of  Rome  was  not  abandoned.  But,  cultured,  diplo- 
matic, broad-minded  within  the  limits  of  the  Vatican  traditions, 
Leo  XIII  did  much  to  assuage  the  strife  between  Catholicism 
and  modern  society.  His  encyclical  Rerum  Novarum,  on  the 
labour  question,  is  the  charter  of  Christian  socialism.  In  1891- 
92  he  formally  advised  French  Catholics  not  to  waste  their 
energy  in  the  defence  of  lost  political  causes :  "  This,"  he  is 
reported  to  have  said,  clasping  a  crucifix,  "  this  is  the  only  corpse 
that  the  Church  clings  to."  A  number  of  monarchists  obeyed, 
not  without  reluctance,  and  formed  the  so-called  "  rallied  "  party. 
Literature  was  full  of  vague  Neo-Catholicisms.  The  Government 
was  ready  to  meet  the  Church  half-way.  A  "  new  spirit "  pre- 


•  There  was  a  "  clerical  question "  even  In  banking.  The  Catholics 
founded  a  financial  establishment,  the  Union  G6n£rale,  which  collapsed  in 
1882,  ruining:  many  small  investors.  The  Panama  scandals,  in  which 
Jews  and  anti-clerical  politicians  were  Implicated,  were  considered  by  the 
Catholics  as  a  sort  of  revenge  for  their  own  failure. 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  273 

vailed,  to  use  the  phrase  made  famous  in  1894  by  Spuller,  a 
statesman  interested  in  religious  questions.  The  Meline  admin- 
istration relied  for  two  years  on  the  support  of  the  Catholic 
"rallies"  (1896-98). 

We  have  already  shown  how  the  Dreyfus  case  opposed  once 
more  reaction  and  revolution,  and  involved  a  realignment  of 
parties.  An  aggressive  Order,  the  Assumptionist  Fathers,  who 
had  put  on  a  marvellously  profitable  basis  the  cult  of  Saint 
Anthony  of  Padua,  had  at  their  service  a  well-drilled  and 
unscrupulous  Press.  The  Dominicans  and  the  Jesuits  had 
prepared  in  their  schools  a  whole  generation  of  military  officers 
and  civil  servants  entirely  devoted  to  them.  Anti-Semitism  was 
gaining  ground.  It  seemed  as  though  a  military-clerical  coup 
d'etat,  a  repetition  of  the  2nd  of  December,  1851,  or  of  the 
16th  of  May,  1877,  might  take  place  at  any  moment.  The 
Radicals  denounced  "  the  alliance  between  the  sabre  and  the  holy- 
water  sprinkler."  Every  victory  of  Dreyfus's  cause  was  a  defeat 
for  the  Church :  she  had  taken  the  wrong  side,  and  had  soon  to 
pay  the  penalty. 

Waldeck-Rousseau  wanted  to  defend  the  Republic  against 
clericalism.  But  he  hoped  this  could  be  achieved  within  the 
limits  of  the  Concordat,  by  suppressing,  curbing,  and  keeping 
under  permanent  control  the  turbulent  Catholic  elements,  those 
monks  in  whom  breathed  again  the  spirit  of  Saint-Bartholomew's 
night.  In  this  he  had  the  support,  not  merely  of  the  Radicals, 
but  of  many  reasonable  Catholics,  and  even  of  a  large  number  of 
the  clergy.  The  monks  were  not  popular  with  the  priests,  who 
accused  them  of  using  vulgar  and  unscrupulous  methods;  of 
ignoring  the  authority  of  the  bishops;  of  confiscating  all  the 
activities  of  the  French  Church,  whilst  the  priests  were  confined 
to  the  least  interesting  and  the  least  profiable  routine  duties. 

An  association  law  was  passed,  requiring  every  religious 
order  to  apply  for  authorization,  with  a  statement  of  its  statutes, 
membership,  and  property.  This  intrusion  of  the  State  into  their 
private  affairs  was  intensely  disagreeable  to  organizations  which 
had  always  managed  to  dodge  taxes  and  to  evade  factory  laws, 
and  which  did  not  care  to  reveal  the  extent  of  their  fabulous 
wealth.  Waldeck-Rousseau  retired  at  the  height  of  his  triumph, 


274     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXra  CENTURY 

recommending  M.  Combes  as  his  successor.  He  could  not  but 
know  that  the  latter,  who  had  studied  for  the  priesthood,  was  a 
rabid  anti-clerical.  The  association  law  was  turned  into  an 
instrument  for  suppressing  rather  than  regulating  religious 
orders.  Many  did  not  even  apply.  The  rest  were,  for  the  sake 
of  expedition,  divided  into  large  groups — teaching  orders,  com- 
mercial orders,  contemplative  orders — and  whole  blocks  at  a  time 
were  denied  legal  recognition.  Only  a  few  were  authorized.  The 
Premier,  a  fiery  septuagenarian,  did  not  allow  this  legislation  to 
become  a  dead  letter.  A  number  of  convents  and  monasteries 
were  secularized,  or  had  to  emigrate  to  foreign  parts.  And,  as 
he  could  not  reach  the  Brothers  of  the  Christian  Doctrine, 
authorized  long  before,  Combes  had  a  special  law  passed  against 
"  congreganist "  education  in  July,  1904. 


TUB  CHURCH  AND  FREEMASONRY. — The  Church  ascribed  the  persecution 
she  was  suffering  to  the  activity  of  the  "  Satanic  sect,"  Freemasonry ;  for, 
especially  under  the  Republic,  Freemasonry  had  become  the  backbone  of 
the  radical  anti-clerical  party.  The  phrase  "  Satanic  sect "  was  meant 
very  literally.  An  anti-clerical  of  the  lowest  type,  Leo  Taxil,  announced 
his  conversion  to  Catholicism  (1885),  and  began  to  denounce  his  former 
associates,  the  Freemasons,  as  devil-worshippers.  He  held  the  Catholic 
world  breathless  with  the  horrific  revelations  of  a  certain  Miss  Diana 
Vaughan,  who  knew  all  the  secrets  of  the  Luciferians.  He  kept  up  the 
deception  for  a  number  of  years,  until,  on  the  eve  of  being  exposed,  he 
publicly  confessed  that  it  was  a  hoax  (1897).  But  many  Catholics  still 
believe  in  this  rather  crude  nursery  tale. — Second  episode :  in  1903-4  the 
Minister  of  War,  in  order  to  weed  out  of  the  army  the  "  clerical "  element 
which  had  become  a  danger  to  the  Republic,  made  use  of  secret  individual 
reports  provided  by  the  Masons.  These  reports  were  sold  to  a  Catholic 
deputy,  who  published  them.  France  was  disgusted  with  the  whole  affair, 
and  the  popularity  of  the  Radicals  has  been  waning  ever  since. 

Unsavoury  affairs  cropped  up  in  the  course  of  these  interminable  diffi- 
culties: the  million  of  the  Cartliusian  monks,  the  corrupt  practices  of 
Receiver  Duez,  etc. 


Yet  Premier  Combes  did  not  think  that  the  hour  of  separation 
had  come.  He  hated  and  feared  the  Church  too  much  to  set 
her  free.  But,  under  his  administration,  the  absurdity  of  the 
Concordat  became  manifest.  The  Republican  Government  was 
paying  out  salaries  to  its  open  enemies,  and  to  a  fanatical  anti- 
Catholic  was  entrusted  the  selection  of  bishops.  The  Pope  was 
morally  justified  in  wishing  to  end  this  situation;  nay,  the 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  275 

Concordat  itself  provided  that  a  new  convention  would  have  to 
be  drawn,  in  case  the  head  of  the  French  State  should  be  a 
non-Catholic.  But  the  alternative  to  the  existing  regime  was 
separation,  not  a  new  treaty.  Meanwhile  the  new  Pope, 
Pius  X,  and  his  Secretary  of  State,  Cardinal  Merry  del  Val, 
adopted  a  less  diplomatic  attitude  than  Leo  XIII  and  Rampolla. 
Two  bishops,  accused  by  members  of  their  dioceses,  were  called 
to  Rome,  in  defiance  of  the  Organic  Articles.  The  Government 
ordered  them  to  ignore  the  summons;  yet  they  were  compelled 
to  resign  their  functions.  The  Holy  See  systematically  refused 
to  confirm  Combes'  appointees.  In  a  few  years  half  the 
bishoprics  of  France  would  have  been  vacant.  The  Concordat 
was  breaking  down  entirely. 

Oddly  enough,  it  was  the  question  of  the  Pope's  temporal 
power  in  Rome  which  brought  about  the  long-deferred  crisis. 
After  thirty  years'  estrangement,  the  reconciliation  of  Italy  and 
France  was  sealed  by  official  visits:  King  Victor-Emmanuel  III 
came  to  Paris;  President  Loubet  could  not  but  go  to  Rome. 
But  the  Pope  cannot  allow  the  head  of  a  Catholic  State  to  meet 
the  "  usurper  "  in  the  very  city  he  filched  from  the  Church :  the 
Emperor  of  Austria  dares  not  visit  the  capital  of  his  ally.  A 
note  of  protest  was  sent  round  to  the  diplomatic  representatives 
of  the  Holy  See.  France  would  have  ignored  this  platonic 
manifestation,  had  it  not  been  discovered  that  there  were  two 
versions  of  this  document — the  one  communicated  to  the  French 
Government,  which  was  harmless  enough,  and  another  reserved 
for  the  other  Powers,  couched  in  much  more  offensive  language. 
France  immediately  recalled  her  ambassador  from  the  Vatican, 
and  expelled  the  papal  nuncio  from  Paris.*  Naturally  the 
Concordat  lapsed  ipso  facto.  A  new  regime  had  to  be 
organized. 

This  regime,  unfortunately,  could  not  be  the  result  of  an 
agreement  between  Church  and  State,  since  all  diplomatic 
relations  were  broken  between  the  Vatican  and  'Paris.  Besides, 
the  Papacy  would  never  have  accepted  the  principle  of  the 

*  Later  the  diplomatic  papers  of  the  Papal  Legation  in  Paris  were  seized, 
and  afforded  evidence  of  ~M.gr.  Montagnini's  active  intervention  in  French 
politics. 


276     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

separation,  which  was  now  inevitable.  France,  therefore,  was 
obliged  to  legislate  on  ecclesiastical  affairs  without  consulting 
the  official  representatives  of  the  Church.  But  there  were  in 
Parliament  many  sincere  and  able  Catholics,  with  whose 
constant  collaboration  the  law  was  prepared.  The  bigoted 
anti-clericalism  of  Combes  was  no  longer  the  dominant  factor. 
The  man  who  became  identified  with  the  Separation  law, 
Aristide  Briand,  was  singularly  broad-minded.  Even  Eadical 
Republicans,  haunted  with  the  ominous  precedent  of  the  First 
Revolution  and  the  Vendee,  were  willing  to  be  generous  on 
all  minor  points.  The  law,  such  as  it  was,  promulgated  in 
July,  1905,  provided  liberal  pensions  for  aged  priests,  and  a 
series  of  transitional  measures  gradually  to  wean  the  Church 
from  State  support.  The  State  renounced  its  right  of  appointing, 
or  even  nominating,  bishops.  All  the  other  restrictions  which 
for  a  century  had  paralysed  Catholicism,  were  removed. 
Ecclesiastical  property,  after  an  inventory,  would  be  turned  over 
to  the  Catholics  themselves,  organized  into  "  Associations  for 
Public  Worship,"  which  the  clergy  were  free  to  compose  exactly 
as  they  saw  fit.  In  order  to  prevent  schism,  it  was  stated  that 
the  property  would  always  be  attributed  to  the  associations  in 
communion  with  the  original  Church.  A  minority  of  Roman 
Catholics,  therefore,  would  remain  in  possession,  even  if  the 
majority  of  the  parishioners  should  go  over  to  Protestantism 
01  Gallicanism. 

This  regime,  which  safeguarded  the  dignity,  the  discipline, 
and  even  the  material  interests  of  the  Church,  was  in  every  way 
more  liberal  than  the  one  Rome  had  accepted  in  Prussia.  When 
the  French  bishops  met  in  general  convention,  they  first  of  all 
sent  to  the  Pope  a  telegram  endorsing  his  theoretical  condemna- 
tion of  the  separation,  but  by  a  substantial  majority  they  agreed 
upon  a  policy  of  compliance  with  the  law.  Pius  X  affected  to 
ignore  this,  the  main  result  of  their  activities,  and  on  the 
strength  of  their  first  message  he  affirmed  that  the  French 
episcopate  were  with  him  in  his  uncompromising  resistance.  A 
number  of  Catholic  professors  and  members  of  the  Institute 
ventured  to  draw  up  a  petition,  respectfully  entreating  His 
Holiness  not  to  hurl  France  into  an  interminable  conflict. 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  277 

They  were  sneered  at  by  the  Vatican  Press  as  "green 
cardinals."  *  The  next  general  elections  were  fought  chiefly  on 
the  Separation  question,  and  the  policy  of  the  Government  was 
unequivocally  endorsed  even  by  the  rural  districts.  In  a  word, 
there  is  convincing  evidence  that  the  bulk  of  French  Catholics 
were  willing  to  give  the  law  a  fair  trial.  The  opposition  came 
from  Borne. 

The  Curia,  deluded  by  a  few  incorrigible  French  reactionists, 
probably  thought  that  it  could  drive  the  Government  into  acts  of 
open  persecution,  which  would  cause  a  revulsion  of  feelings  and 
the  overthrow  of  the  present  Eepublic.  These  expectations  were 
disappointed:  M.  Briand  and  the  majority  who  supported  him 
remained  calm  and  firm.  The  churches  were  not  closed.  The 
violent  and  ignorant  element  seized  upon  the  inventories  as 
a  pretext  for  disturbances  in  a  few  great  cities  and  in  some 
remote  villages.  But  these  unjustifiable  riots  were  blamed 
by  the  more  enlightened  Catholics,  and  the  venerable  Cure 
of  .Sainte-Clotilde  said  to  the  mixed  crowd  of  toughs  and 
aristocrats  who  pretended  to  "  defend  "  his  church :  "  You  are 
pious  hooligans ! "  t  Year  after  year,  as  a  result  of  this 
militant  policy,  the  Church  has  forfeited  some  of  the  real 
advantages  that  the  law  of  1905  provided  for  her.  Public 
worship  has  never  been  interrupted  or  disturbed.  But  the 
tenure  of  the  churches  is  precarious:  no  one  is  responsible  for 
structural  repairs,  and  a  number  of  religious  buildings  have 
already  been  closed  and  condemned  as  unsafe.  However,  a 
modus  vivendi  is  being  evolved.  Without  any  further 
legislation,  the  Catholics  will  probably  secure  the  full  title  to 
their  own  churches,  by  individual  purchases  at  a  nominal  price 
from  the  municipalities.  But  many  years  and  many  millions 
will  have  been  wasted  in  useless  strife. 

To  define  the  attitude  of  Rome  in  this  affair,  we  are  compelled 
to  use  again  the  words  clericalism  and  ultramontanism.  The 
Curia  was  afraid  lest  the  new  regime  should  give  the  French 
Catholics  some  authority  over  their  own  finances,  and  therefore 
over  their  local  policy  and  hierarchy.  The  spiritual  and  disci- 

*  The  uniform  of  members  of  the  Institute  is  braided  with  green  palms, 
t  "  Des  Apaches  pieux." 


278     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

plinary  powers  of  the  Pope  were  not  threatened  by  the  separa- 
tion; on  the  contrary,  his  authority  was  freed  from  any  trace 
of  lay  interference.  But  more  was  wanted:  the  total  subjection 
of  the  national  clergy  and  laity,  in  all  things,  to  the  Holy  See. 
This  goal  has  been  reached:  the  last  liberties  of  the  Gallican 
Church  have  disappeared.  It  remains  to  be  seen  whether  a 
deep  blow  has  not  been  struck  thereby  at  Catholicism  itself. 
No  schism  has  taken  place.  The  Catholics  have  shown  an 
admirable  example  of  passive  obedience;  but  many  of  them  feel 
that  they  have  been  treated  with  scant  respect,  led  against 
their  own  better  sense  into  a  hopeless  battle.  How  long  will 
discipline  stand  such  a  strain? 

In  this  question  of  disestablishment,  the  chief  point  of 
interest  is  perhaps  this  silent  crisis  within  the  Church  rather 
than  the  open  conflict  with  the  State.  It  is  an  episode  in  the 
war  of  extermination  waged  by  the  Roman  autocracy  against  all 
forms  of  liberalism.  The  crushing  out  of  the  Modernist  and 
Sillonist  movements  is  another  manifestation  of  the  same  policy. 

§  4.  MODERNISM. 

Modernism  is  not  the  direct  continuation  of  Liberal 
Catholicism,  for  Lamennais  before  the  fall,  Montalembert  and 
Lacordaire  all  their  lives,  were  conservative  in  their  theology. 
Under  the  Second  Empire,  two  Catholic  philosophers,  Abbe 
Henri  Maret  and  Father  Gratry,  attempted  to  reconcile  fearless 
and  cogent  thinking  with  the  dogmatic  tradition.  Gratry,  who 
as  chaplain  of  the  Superior  Normal  School  influenced  a  number 
of  young  men,  revived  the  Oratorian  order  for  that  very  purpose. 
Maret  was  the  head  of  the  Theological  School  at  the  Sorbonne; 
he  gathered  there  a  number  of  remarkable  professors — Bautain, 
Gratry,  Lavigerie,  Freppel,  Perreyve,  Adolphe  Perraud.  These 
two  men  met  with  indifferent  success:  Gratry  died  isolated, 
almost  persecuted  and  in  despair;  Maret  never  secured  full 
canonical  recognition  for  his  school,  which  was  finally  suppressed 
by  the  State,  and  he  lived  under  a  constant  menace  of  excom- 
munication. Both  are  deeply  forgotten  in  our  days.  But  they 
prepared  a  second  generation  of  scholars  and  thinkers,  who  under 
the  more  liberal  rule  of  Leo  XIII  attained  high  dignities: 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  279 

Perraud  even  became  a  cardinal.  He  and  Mgr.  Duchesne  were 
members  of  the  Institute  of  France.  However,  it  should  not  be 
imagined  that  Leo  XIII  was  personally  inclined  to  modernism: 
he  intimated  that  the  Summa  of  Saint  Thomas  Aquinas  was  to 
remain  the  basis  of  all  philosophical  teaching  in  the  Church, 
and  Abbe  Loisy  was  dismissed  from  the  Catholic  Institute  of 
Paris  in  1894. 

We  have  noted  the  so-called  neo-Catholic  movement  im- 
mediately before  the  Dreyfus  crisis.  It  was  but  a  superficial 
sign  of  the  great  revival  of  religious  thought,  which,  although 
"  the  Affair  "  interfered  with  its  development,  bore  magnificent 
fruit.  Within  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years  the  Catholics  can 
boast  such  able  men  as  Blondel,  Fonsegrive,  Laberthonniere, 
Sertillanges,  Maumus,  Le  Roy,  Goyau,  Houtin,  who  dropped  by 
the  way,  and  the  lost  leader,  Loisy.  All  are  earnest  thinkers 
and  believers.  Negligible  in  comparison  are  the  political 
converts  like  Maurras,  Lemaitre,  Bourget,  Barres — orthodox 
Catholics  who  are  probably  not  Christians.  The  Lyons  review 
Demain  (To-morrow)  was  as  great  a  credit  to  the  faith  which 
inspired  it  as  the  Assumptionist  paper  La  Croix  was  a 
disgrace.  Any  one  who  will  compare  the  substantial  and 
suggestive  catalogue  of  the  Catholic  publishers  Bloud,  for 
instance,  with  the  sickening  literature  in  vogue  twenty  years 
ago  will  be  struck  with  the  difference. 

There  was  no  "school"  of  modernists.  The  tendency  was 
a  spirit,  or,  to  use  their  own  favourite  phrase,  a  life,  rather  than 
a  doctrine.  It  may  be  considered  as  part  of  the  anti-in- 
tellectualist  movement  of  which  William  James  and  Bergson  are 
the  leaders.  With  Houtin,  once  a  modernist  priest  himself,  we 
do  not  believe  that  modernism  had  any  great  future  in  France. 
The  country  is  still  too  fond  of  sharply  defined  logical  thinking 
to  be  satisfied  with  these  hazy  syntheses.  The  encyclical 
Pascendi  Dominici  Gregis  in  1907,  which  summed  up  the  new 
theories  with  superadded  clearness  and  condemned  modernism 
root  and  branch,  was  on  the  whole  favourably  received  by  genuine 
freethinkers.*  The  fact  remains  that  this  latest  attempt  at 

*  Liberal  Protestants,  on  the  contrary,  were  as  a  rule  very  favourable  to 
modernism. 


280     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXTH  CENTURY 

liberalizing  Catholic  theology  through  immanentism  or  creative 
evolution  has  failed.  A  few  individuals  left  the  Church,  like 
Loisy  and  Houtin;  others  protested  anonymously;  but  the 
movement  of  revolt  was  an  imperceptible  ripple  on  a  boundless 
sea.  The  Roman  hierarchy  has  proved  that  it  could  enforce 
conformity  in  matters  of  faith  just  as  it  could  maintain  discipline 
in  questions  of  government. 

At  the  same  time  yet  another  manifestation  of  liberalism  was 
defeated.  The  dream  of  Christian  democracy,  which  appeared 
to  Lamennais  in  1831,  to  many  Socialists  as  late  as  1848,  and 
again  to  Loyson  and  Gratry  a  generation  later,  was  revived  by 
Marc  Sangnier  and  Abbe  Lemire.  The  latter  is  a  priest  inter- 
ested in  practical  social  reforms;  he  has  won  the  devotion  of 
the  Flemish  peasants  who  send  him  to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies, 
and  the  respectful  sympathy  of  his  anti-clerical  colleagues. 
The  former  is  a  wealthy  and  eloquent  philanthropist  who  created, 
somewhat  on  the  line  of  the  Dreyfusist  "  Popular  Universities," 
an  active  social  and  educational  centre  called  "  Le  Sillon  "  (the 
Furrow).  As  soon  as  it  was  realized  that  both  of  them  were 
genuinely  democratic,  they  were  treated  with  suspicion,  and  even 
sharply  rebuked.  In  every  field  Catholicism  stands  for  con- 
servatism and  authority:  these  are  the  essence  of  the  system. 
There  always  will  be  parties  and  classes  interested  in  the  defence 
of  the  existing  order;  the  Opportunists,  once  anti-clerical,  have 
made  their  peace  with  the  Church;  one  may  foresee  the  time 
when  the  Radicals  will  go  to  Canossa,  if  thereby  they  can  obtain 
assistance  against  the  Socialists.  If  the  Socialists  should  ever 
consolidate  themselves  in  power,  they  would  discover  the  merits 
of  Roman  inertia.  Catholicism  polarizes  all  the  elements  of 
resistance  to  progress :  this  is  the  secret  of  its  eternity.* 


*  It  may  be  added  that  if  the  Catholics  are  conservative,  they  need  not 
be  narrowly  and  unintelllgently  so.  The  L.e  Play  school  of  political  eco- 
nomists, for  instance,  is  not  negligible.  The  working  men's  clubs  founded 
by  Count  Albert  de  Mun  after  the  war  are  not  without  influence.  The 
young  men's  Catholic  associations,  created  by  the  same  "  aristocratic 
Socialist,"  have  120,000  members  between  the  ages  of  15  and  30.  They 
are  orthodox,  conservative,  yet  full  of  life.  Their  conventions  are  im- 
portant events:  it  was  before  the  meeting  of  1898,  at  Besangon,  that 
Brunetiere  gave  his  famous  speech  on  the  necessity  of  faith.  The  Union 
of  Catholic  Railwaymen  boasts  of  50,000  members.  (The  Yellow  or  anti- 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  281 

But,  whilst  it  is  for  many  a  mere  ecclesiastical  police,  a 
buttress  of  social  unequality,  it  remains,  for  untold  thousands, 
a  school  of  charity  and  sacrifice,  a  gateway  to  the  better  life. 
Sheer  Voltairianism  has  gradually  lost  caste  and  sunk  to  the 
level  of  Monsieur  Homais.  The  modern  doubter  is  a  disciple  of 
Kenan  and  has  a  keen  sense  of  the  beauty  and  grandeur  of 
religion.  Anti-clericalism,  since  the  disestablishment  law,  is 
on  the  wane.  Religious  peace  is  not  in  sight;  but  violent  and 
degrading  warfare,  let  us  trust,  is  at  an  end. 


§  5.  PROTESTANTISM,  ETC. 

Protestantism  reorganized  under  Napoleon — The  two  established 
Churches — The  Revival  and  the  Free  Evangelical  Churches — La 
Revue  de  Strasbourg  and  liberal  theology — Conflict  between  ortho- 
dox and  liberals :  Coquerel  and  Guizot — The  Declaration  of  Faith  of 
1872 ;  schism — Honourable  but  unimportant  part  of  Protestantism 
in  French  life. 

Judaism  organized  under  Napoleon — Complete  emancipation  after 
1818 — Scholars  and  artists  among  French  Jews — Anti-Semitism: 
Drumont  and  La  Libre  Parole — The  Dreyfus  case:  minor  import- 
ance of  anti-Semitism  (Note  on  the  Jews  in  Algeria). 

Other  Religions — Failure  of  new  Churches:  Gallicanism  (Abb* 
Chatel,  Father  Hyacinthe  Loyson) — Saint-Simonianism — Positivism. 

Cousin's  eclecticism  as  the  "  natural  religion "  of  the  middle 
classes — Its  long-continued  influence. 

Intense  interest  of  modern  France  in  religious  questions. 

The  history  of  Protestantism  in  the  nineteenth  century  is 
curiously  parallel  with  that  of  Catholicism.  Freed  from  all 
disabilities  by  Louis  XVI  and  the  Revolution  the  Protestants 
were  organized  into  two  State  Churches  by  Napoleon  Bonaparte 
in  1802.*  Two  theological  schools  were  created,  at  Montauban 
and  Strasbourg.  Protestantism  did  not  much  profit  by  its  new 
official  status  or  by  the  wave  of  religious  feeling  which  swept 
over  France:  it  remained  a  small,  historical  body,  formal  in  its 
creed  and  living  on  its  traditions.  It  was  not  until  the  end  of 
the  Napoleonic  wars  had  reopened  France  to  English  influences 
that  a  "  revival "  took  place,  thanks  chiefly  to  the  efforts  of 

Socialist   syndicates   of  Messrs.    Japy   and  Bie'try  are  looked  upon  with 
sympathy  by  the  Catholics,  but  are  not  organized  on  a  religious  basis.) 

•  The  Augsbourg  Confession,  or  Lutheran  Church,  mostly  in  Alsace ;  and 
the  Reformed,  or  Calvinistic  Church. 


282     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

Wesleyans.  This  movement  was  not  encouraged  by  the  estab- 
lished Churches.  Conservative  Protestants  took  exception  both 
to  the  "  undignified  "  methods  of  the  revival  and  to  its  excessive 
emphasis  of  one  dogma,  the  Atonement.  In  spite  of  conciliatory 
efforts  at  the  synods  of  1848^9,  these  differences  led  to  a 
disruption,  almost  to  a  schism;  Agenor  de  Gasparin  and 
Frederic  Monod  founded  the  Union  of  French  Evangelical 
Churches,  on  the  basis  of  revival  theology,  and  independent  of 
the  establishment. 

From  1850  to  1869  the  Revue  de  Strasbourg  was  the  organ 
of  those  we  might  call  the  "higher  critics"  of  the  day — 
Keuss,  Colani,  Scherer.  But  the  attempted  reconciliation  of 
science  with  traditional  dogma  was  not  effected.  Scherer  went 
over  to  extreme  freethought,  and  in  a  valedictory  article 
Colani  had  to  confess  failure.  Strasbourg  was  an  active  centre 
of  Protestant  thought,  and  an  admirable  point  of  contact 
between  the  cultures  of  France  and  Germany.  The  fate  of  war, 
in  1870-71,  made  it  an  outpost  of  aggressive  Germanism,  to 
the  great  loss  of  both  countries.  France  lost  nearly  one-half  of 
her  Protestant  population,  and  the  Strasbourg  theological  school 
was  transferred  to  Paris. 

The  struggle  between  conservatism  and  liberalism  is  best 
exemplified  by  the  Coquerel  episode.  Athanase  Coquerel,  junior, 
a  thoroughgoing  Liberal,  was  suspended  by  a  Presbyterial 
Council,  in  spite  of  the  unanimous  support  of  his  congregation 
(1864).  Guizot,  in  this  affair,  assumed  the  role  of  a  Protestant 
pope :  he  claimed  that  "  the  Council  of  the  Church  must  be  the 
defender  of  the  souls  of  Coquerel's  flock,  and  decide  for  them  the 
supreme  question  of  faith  and  life."  This  is  essentially  the 
Catholic  attitude.  In  1872,  again  under  the  inspiration  of 
Guizot,  a  synod  accepted  a  stricter  confession  of  faith;  the 
expected,  we  might  even  say  the  desired,  result  was  a  formal 
separation  between  the  Orthodox  and  the  Liberal  elements. 

The  Protestants,  through  men  like  Ferdinand  Buisson  and 
Felix  P6caut,  played  an  honourable  part  in  the  development  of 
public  education.  Their  role  during  the  Dreyfus  crisis  was  also 
creditable.  They  showed  no  animosity  during  the  interminable 
conflict  between  the  State  and  the  Catholic  Church.  They 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  283 

accepted  the  Separation  law  without  enthusiasm,  for,  whilst  it 
was  in  accord  with  their  principles,  it  was  no  less  evidently 
detrimental  to  their  material  interests.  Some  foreign  observers 
had  prophesied  a  great  forward  movement  of  Protestanism  after 
the  Separation:  but  no  such  revival  has  taken  place.  The 
breach  between  Liberals  and  Orthodox  has  not  even  been 
healed. 

Certain  so-called  Nationalist  writers  affect  to  consider  Pro- 
testantism in  France  as  a  foreign  element.  This  is  manifestly 
and  wilfully  unfair :  the  sons  of  the  Huguenots,  the  disciples  of 
Calvin,  are  French  of  the  French.  But  it  is  true  that  they 
form  a  small  nation — barely  700,000  in  number — within  the  main 
body;  that  their  traditions  are  different  from  those  of  the  rest 
of  the  country;  that  they  cannot  help  turning  their  eyes  towards 
those  lands  where  their  faith  is  in  the  ascendant  like  England 
and  Germany;  that,  in  education,  in  outlook,  not  seldom  in 
race,  they  are  more  cosmopolitan  than  the  average.  There 
is  no  national  anti-Protestant  prejudice  in  France,  although 
there  are  local  difficulties  in  the  south  and  in  the  east.  But 
there  is  a  sort  of  reciprocal  coolness,  recognized  by  competent 
judges  like  Paul  .Sabatier  and  Eoberty,  between  the  Protestant 
minority  and  their  Catholic  or  Free-thinking  countrymen.  These 
facts  point  to  the  conclusion  that  French  Protestantism  is  an 
obstinate  survival  rather  than  a  growing  force. 

The  Eevolution  removed  all  the  political  and  civil  disabilities 
of  the  Jews.  In  the  case  of  the  Portuguese  Jews,  few  in 
number,  thoroughly  assimilated,  and  found  mainly  in  Paris 
and  Bordeaux,  this  was  effected  almost  immediately  and  without 
protest.  The  problem  of  the  German  Jews,  in  Alsace  and 
the  Rhine  provinces  annexed  to  France  in  1795,  was  not  settled 
without  difficulty.  In  this  case,  the  energetic  methods  of 
Napoieon  proved  permanently  effective.  In  1806  he  summoned 
an  assembly  of  Jewish  notables,  somewhat  arbitrarily  chosen 
by  the  Prefects.  That  assembly  was  succeeded  in  1807  by 
a  Grand  Sanhedrim.  This  authoritative  body  declared:  that 
the  Bible  did  not  prevent  the  Jews  from  accepting  the  French 
legal  system ;  that  polygamy  had  long  been  abolished ;  that  they 
considered  themselves  loyal  Frenchmen  and  were  ready  to  serve 


284     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXra  CENTURY 

France  by  all  means  in  their  power.  Thereupon  the  Jewish 
Church  was  organized  on  the  hierarchic  and  centralized  plan  dear 
to  Napoleon,  and  took  its  official  place  in  the  national  system; 
but  it  was  not  until  1831  that  the  rabbis  were  salaried  by 
the  State,  like  the  ministers  of  the  other  religions.  However, 
anti-Semitic  sentiment  was  still  strong  in  the  eastern  provinces, 
and,  by  the  Madrid  decree  of  1808,  Napoleon  felt  it  necessary 
to  institute  a  provisional  regime  for  the  German  Jews.  They 
were  not  allowed  to  settle  in  other  parts  of  the  Empire,  except 
as  agriculturists;  they  could  not  buy  substitutes  for  serving 
in  the  army:  these  exceptional  measures  were  to  remain  in 
force  for  ten  years.  In  1815,  by  the  treaties  of  Vienna, 
France  lost  her  recent  acquisitions  of  German  territory,  and 
the  Alsatian  problem  became  more  manageable.  In  1818 
no  one  asked  that  the  Madrid  decree  be  renewed,  and  all 
French  Jews  enjoyed  exactly  the  same  rights  as  other 
citizens. 

Until  the  last  decade  of  the  nineteenth  century  France  was 
practically  free  from  anti-Semitism,  although  in  1844  Toussenel 
published  his  Les  Juifs  Rois  de  I'Epoque,  a  study  of 
financial  feudalism.  The  typical  French  Jew  is  neither  the 
wealthy  banker  nor  the  sordid  dweller  in  the  Ghetto:  he  is  an 
artist  and  a  scholar.  The  French- Jewish  roll  of  fame  is  brilliant ; 
philologists  and  archaeologists  especially  will  remember  the 
names  of  H.  Derembourg,  Oppert,  S.  and  T.  Reinach,  A.  and 
J.  Darmesteter,  Michel  Breal.  In  music  and  the  drama, 
whether  as  actors  or  authors,  the  Jews  are  also  particularly 
strong.  In  1880,  M.  Edouard  Drumont  began  his  anti-Semitic 
campaign,  which  he  has  continued  with  unflagging  energy, 
undeniable  talent,  and  intense  sincerity.  His  paper,  La  lAbre 
Parole,  has  set  the  example  which  the  Catholic  'Press,  La 
Croix  for  instance,  was  only  too  willing  to  imitate.  French 
anti-Semitism  is  not  a  racial  prejudice:  it  is  a  mixture  of 
Catholic  fanaticism,  demagogic  pseudo-socialism,  and  anti- 
German  Chauvinism.  A  few  cosmopolitan  families,  like  the 
Rothschild,  are  fabulously  wealthy  and  bear  Teutonic  names: 
this  was  sufficient  to  draw  upon  them  the  jealousy  and  hatred 
of  the  populace.  Anti-Semitism  played  some  part  in  the  inception 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  285 

of  the  Dreyfus  case;  but  although  it  remained  noisy  enough, 
it  soon  became  a  minor  element  in  that  great  conflict.  Even 
at  the  height  of  the  crisis,  when  the  anti-Dreyfusists  seemed 
wholly  in  control,  no  anti-Semite  was  returned  to  the  Chamber 
of  Deputies  by  European  France:  it  was  Algeria,  where 
conditions  were  absolutely  different,  which  sent  Drumont, 
Morinaud  and  others,  for  one  legislature  only,  to  the  Palais- 
Bourbon.  It  may  be  noted  that  the  old  aristocracy,  ultra- 
Catholic  though  it  be,  has  no  insuperable  objection  to  the 
matrimonial  annexation  of  Jewish  heiresses,  and  that  the 
spokesman  of  monarchy,  tradition,  society,  and  the  Church, 
the  editor  of  the  Gaulois,  M.  Arthur  Meyer,  is  a  Jew.  In  the 
eyes  of  the  Socialist  there  is  no  difference  between  Jewish 
and  Christian  capital.  So  it  is  not  probable  that  the  Jewish 
question  will  ever  become  a  national  danger  in  France. 


THE  JEWS  IN  ALGERIA. — The  Algerian  Jews  are  not  in  any  way  superior 
to  the  Arabs  or  the  Berbers ;  neither  are  they  much  more  in  sympathy  with 
French  civilization;  yet  they  were  enfranchised  all  at  once  by  the 
Cremieux  decree  in  1870,  whilst  the  Mohammedans  are  still  treated  as  a 
conquered  people.  The  first  result  of  this  injustice  was  the  great  insur- 
rection of  1871.  The  Algerian  Jews,  however,  are  fast  getting  European  - 
ized,  and  will  soon  be  bona  fide  French  citizens. 


The  three  religions  recognized  by  the  State  until  1905  do  not 
exhaust  the  spiritual  life  of  France.  No  other  Church,  it  is  true, 
achieved  any  degree  of  influence.  Abbe  Chatel  under  Louis- 
Philippe,  Father  Hyacinthe  Loyson  after  1870,  attempted  to 
start  schisms  on  Gallican  lines ;  but  the  result  was  disheartening. 
Recent  efforts  in  the  same  direction,  after  the  Separation,  would 
have  passed  absolutely  unnoticed  had  not  the  Roman  Catholics 
invaded  the  schismatic  places  of  worship  and  interrupted  their 
services — a  dangerous  example  to  set  before  the  Parisian  popu- 
lace! Saint-Simonianism  about  1830  was  meant  to  be  a  new 
Christianity.  Under  Bazard  and  Enfantin  it  had  preachers  and 
seminaries,  some  sort  of  ritual,  and  enough  mystic  exaltation  to 
give  it  a  place  among  real  religions.  But,  as  a  sect,  it  ended  in 
division,  scandal,  prosecution,  and  the  farcical  pilgrimage  to  the 
East,  in  quest  of  "  the  Mother."  Positivism  is  a  mighty  move- 
ment ;  but  the  formal  cult  of  humanity  devised  by  Auguste  Comte 


286     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

in  his  latter  years  was  not  accepted  even  by  his  most  prominent 
disciple  Littre,  and  by  the  rest  of  the  world  was  either  ignored 
or  ridiculed.  The  many  queer  little  sects  that  amuse  Parisian 
society  for  a  season  need  not  detain  our  attention. 

Of  greater  significance  are  what  we  might  call  the  lay  churches, 
or  the  substitutes  for  organized  religion.  The  most  definite  of 
these  was  Cousin's  eclecticism.  This  philosophy  did  not  claim 
to  be  original,  but  to  represent  the  "  common  sense  "  of  the  race 
in  religious  matters,  from  Plato  to  Hegel,  by  way  of  Plotinus, 
Descartes,  Voltaire,  Eousseau,  and  Kant.  It  taught  the  exist- 
ence of  God,  the  spirituality,  immortality,  and  responsibility  of 
the  soul;  after  1830,  it  became  the  official  doctrine  of  State 
education — and  Cousin  knew  how  to  keep  discipline  in  his 
"  regiment " !  But  it  was  mercilessly  assailed  by  the  Catholics, 
for  whilst  attempting  to  preserve  all  the  essentials  of  Christian 
metaphysics,  it  had  no  place  for  specifically  Christian  dogma. 
Under  the  Second  Empire  it  lingered  ingloriously,  still  en- 
trenched in  official  positions  (with  Caro,  for  instance),  but 
jeered  at  by  the  orthodox  on  the  one  hand  and  the  positivists  on 
the  other.  The  best  representative  of  the  second  generation  of 
"spiritualists"  was  Jules  Simon,  whose  books  on  Duty  and 
Natural  Religion  were  aptly  called  "  Missals  for  freethinkers." 
When  Jules  Ferry  laid  the  foundations  of  unsectarian  State  educa- 
tion in  1879-82,  it  was  Jules  Simon  who  managed  to  have  the 
essential  tenets  of  spiritualism  preserved  as  the  moral  basis  of 
the  new  system.  As  a  sign  of  the  discredit  into  which  this 
school  of  thought  has  fallen,  we  may  note  that  Premier  Combes 
excited  an  outburst  of  derision  in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  when 
he  professed  himself  "  an  old-fashioned  spiritualist  philosopher." 
M.  Homais,  the  typical  bourgeois  described  by  Flaubert  in 
Madame  Bovary,  held  the  religion  of  "  Socrates,  Voltaire, 
Eousseau,  Franklin,  and  Beranger,"  i.e.,  that  of  Victor  Cousin 
and  Jules  Simon.  His  modern  congeners — no  whit  deeper  or 
more  original  than  he — swear  by  Darwin,  Huxley,  Spencer,  and 
Haeckel.  Spiritualism  was  naught  but  a  compromise — a  hateful 
thing  in  matters  of  faith.  Yet  it  would  be  unjust  to  deny  that 
it  satisfied,  somehow,  the  needs  of  many  souls  who  were  by  no 
means  despicable. 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  287 

The  Fatherland,  the  Revolution,  Humanity,  Science,  have 
in  turn  or  simultaneously  been  proposed  to  our  veneration.  Even 
the  cult  of  Eeason  was  revived  during  the  Dreyfus  crisis  by 
a  former  priest,  Victor  Charbonnel,  whom  Emerson  and  the 
Chicago  Congress  of  Religions  had  first  caused  to  stray  from  the 
Roman  path.  Socialism  is  with  many  an  idealistic  faith,  imply- 
ing the  "  New  Theology's  "  central  belief  that  mankind  is  divine, 
the  collective  incarnation,  the  progressive  self-realization  of  the 
immanent  God.  Certain  it  is  that  the  haunting  sense  of  the 
Great  Beyond  is  present  in  the  France  of  to-day,  as  much  as  in 
any  other  period  in  her  history.  Paris,  apart  from  its  Catholic 
and  Protestant  schools  of  theology,  is  admirably  equipped  for  the 
study  of  religion.*  Societies  like  the  Union  of  the  Servants  of 
Truth  or  the  Union  of  Free-thinkers  and  Free-believers,  books 
like  Charles  Peguy's  Mystery  of  the  Charity  of  Joan  of  Arc, 
afford  definite  evidence  of  this  spiritual  activity.  Even  reckless 
negation  may  be  a  sign  of  intense  concern  in  religious  things: 
the  dull  of  soul  is  a  born  conformist.  The  creed  of  France 
baffles  definition;  but  to  follow  an  unnamed  master,  when  night 
is  darkest,  is  not  that  the  supreme  triumph  of  faith  ? 

•  Courses  In  the  Faculte  des  Lettres,  Ecole  Pratique  des  Hautes  Etudes, 
College  de  France,  Ecole  des  Hautes  Etudes  Sociales,  Musee  Guimet,  etc. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

A.  DBBIDOUR.  Histoire  des  Rapports  de  1'Eglise  et  de  1'Etat  en  Prance  de 
1789  a  1870.  8vo.  Alcan.  1898.  Also  abridgement  in  "  Bibliotheque 
Utile."  Alcan. 

Sous  la  TroisiSme   Republique.     2   vols.     8vo.     Alcan.     (Convenient 

collection  of  facts,  useful  bibliographies,  marred  by  polemical  tone.) 

SALOMON  REINACH.  Orpheus.  Picard,  Paris;  Heinemann,  London;  Put- 
nam, New  York.  1909.  (Bibliographies,  Voltairian  in  tone.) 

G.  WEILL.  Le  Catholicisme  Frangais.  Revue  de  Synthese  Historique, 
December,  1907.  (Excellent  general  indications;  the  other  works  of 
M.  Weill  also  contain  good  bibliographies.) 

A.  H.  GAUTON.  Church  and  State  in  France.  8vo.  283  pp.  Arnold, 
London.  1907. 

PAUL  SABATIBR.  A  propos  de  la  Separation  des  Eglises  et  de  1'Etat. 
12mo.  216  pp.  Fischbacher,  Paris. 

Les  Modernistes.     Fischbacher,  Paris.     1909.     (With  text  of  ency- 
clical Pascendi,  etc.) 

L'Orientation   Religieuse    de    la   France   Actuelle.     18mo.     320    pp. 

Colin,  Paris.     1911. 

•*•** Ce  qu'on  a  fait  de  1'Eglise.  654  pp.  Alcan.  1912.  (Exceed- 
ingly interesting.) 

M.  J.  GUTAU.     L'Irreligion  de  1'Avenir.     8vo.     Alcan,  Paris.     1886. 

E.  BOUTROUX.  Science  et  Religion  dans  la  Philosophie  Contemporaine. 
18mo.  Flammarion.  1908. 

MMB.  C.  COIONBT.  L'Evolution  du  Protestantisme  Frangais  du  XDC«m« 
siecle.  18mo.  Alcan.  1908. 

E.  STAFFER.     La  Declaration  de  Foi  de  1872.     18mo.     Fischbacher.     1908. 

The  Jewish  Encyclopedia. 

A.  Li.  GUERARD.  French  Prophets  of  Yesterday.  8vo.  Fisher  Unwin  and 
Appleton.  1913. 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE 

VIII.   THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION 

1775-99  POPE  Pius  VI. 

1789  November  2.     Principle  of  alienation  of  Church  Property  voted. 

1790  February  13.     Religious  Orders  suppressed. 
July  10.     Church  Property  put  up  for  sale. 
July  12.     Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy. 

1791  September  27.     Final  Emancipation  of  French  Jews. 
1791-93  Persecutions  against  Non-jurors. 

1793  November  10.     Celebration  of  the  Festival  of  Reason. 

1794  June  8.     Celebration  of  the  Festival  of  the  Supreme  Being  (Robes- 

pierre officiating). 

September  18.     Complete  separation  of  Church  and  State. 
1799-1823  POPE  Pius  VII. 

1801  July  15  to  August  28.     Concordat  signed. 

1802  April  2.     Organic  Articles  of  the  Protestant  Churches. 
April  8.     Concordat  promulgated,  with  the  Organic  Articles. 
Chateaubriand,  Le  Gtnie  du  Chriatianisme. 

1804  December    2.     Coronation   of   Napoleon   I.     Pope    Pius   VII   offi- 
ciating. 

1805-9  Annexation  of  Papal  territory. 
1806-8  Reorganization  of  French  Judaism.     Assembly  of  Notables. 

1807  March    2.     Decree  confirming   the   decisions   of   the    Grand   San- 
hedrim. 
1808-18  Temporary  exceptional  regime  for  Alsatian  Jews. 

1809  Pontifical  States  annexed.     Pope  a  prisoner    (Savona,  Fontalne- 

bleau)  until  1814. 
1811  June  to  August     National  Council  of  Paris. 

1813  New  Concordat  signed,  January  25th;  retracted  by  Pope,  March 

24th. 

1814  Pope  returns  to  Rome. 

Catholic  Society  of  Home  Missions. 

1817  New  Concordat,  not  ratified  by  French  Parliament. 
1817—23  Lamennais,  Essai  sur  I' Indifference  en  Matiere  de  Religion. 

1818  Cook  evangelizes  the  South.     Beginning  of  Protestant  Revival. 

1819  Joseph  de  Maistre ;  Du  Pape. 
1821  New  Bishoprics  created. 

1823-29  POPE  LEO  XII. 

1826-28  Agitation     aeainst     the     Jesuits     (Montlosier).     Jesuit     Colleges 

closed. 
1829-30  POPE  Pius  VIII. 


289 


290     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

1830-32  Lamennais's  Liberal  Efforts   (newspaper  L'Avenir). 

1831  Archbishop's  Palace  sacked  by  Parisian  mob. 
1831-46  POPE  GREGORY  XVI. 

1832  Encyclical  Mirari  Vos  condemning  Liberalism. 
Dispersion  of  Saint-Simonian  School  (New  Christianity). 

1833  Ozanam  founds  Society  of  St  Vincent  de  Paul. 
1833  Lamennais,  Paroles  d'un  Crovant. 

1835  Lacordalre's  Lectures  at  Notre-Dame  begin. 
1839  Littrfe's  translation  of  Strauss's  Life  of  Jesus. 
1844-45  Attacks  of  Liberal  Catholics  against  State  Education  renewed. 

1845  Comte's  Religious  Evolution.     Calendar.   1849.     Catechism,   1852. 
Agitation  against  the  Jesuits-Rossi  Mission. 

1846  Miraculous  Apparition  at  La  Salette. 
1846-78  POPE  Pius  EX. 

1848  June.     Archbishop  Affre  killed  on  Barricade. 
November.     Roman  Republic. 

1849  April  to  July.     Roman  Expedition. 
1848-49  Important  Protestant  Synods. 

1849  Union  of  French  Evangelical  Churches. 
1860-69  Revue  de  Strasbourg  (Liberal  Protestant). 

1850  Falloux  Law  on  Education  (compromise  favourable  to  Catholics). 
1851-54  A.  Comte,  Syateme  de  Politique  Positive,  ou  traAte  de  sociologie 

instituant  la  religion  de  I'hnmanite. 

1854  December  8.     Dogma  of  Immaculate  Conception  proclaimed. 

1855  Damaging  Law  Suit  about  La  Salette  Miracle. 
1858  Miraculous  Apparition  at  Lourdes. 

1860  Part  of  Papal  States  annexed  by  Italy. 

1862  Renan's  Course  suspended. 

1863  Renan's  Life  of  Jesus. 

1864  December  8.  Encyclical   Quanta  Cura  and  Syllabus. 

Coquerel-Guizot  Incident  (Liberal  v.  Orthodox  Protestants). 
1866—67  French  Army  of  Occupation  evacuates  Rome,  and  returns. 
1868  December  8.     Council  of  the  Vatican. 
1870  January  3.     Infallibility  proposed  by  Cardinal  Manning,  adopted 

July  13. 

September  20.     Italian  Troops  enter  Rome. 
Secession  of  Father  Hyacinthe  Loyson. 

October  24.     Crfimieux  Decree,  emancipating  Algerian  Jews. 
1872  Protestant     Synod.     Declaration     of     Faith.     Secession     of     the 

Liberals. 
1877  Acute    Politico-religious    Crisis.     Gambetta,    "Clericalism    is   the 

enemy !  " 
1878-1903  POPE  LEO  XIII. 

1879  Jules  Ferry's  Bill  on  Education  (Article  VII). 

1880  March  29.     Ferry  Decrees,  dissolving  Unauthorized  Orders. 
1886  aeg.     Edouard  Drumont:  La  France  Juive   (anti-Semitism). 

1891  Encyclical  Rerum  Novarum   (on  Christian  Socialism). 

1892  Pope  Leo  XIII  advises  French  Catholics  to  rally  to  the  Republic. 
1894  Minister  Spuller,  The  New  Spirit. 

1896-97  Leo  Taxil  and  the  Masonic-Luclferian  hoax. 


THE  RELIGIOUS  QUESTION  291 

1897-99  Height  of  the  Dreyfus  Case.     Anti-Semitism  and  anti-clericalism. 
1901  Waldeck-Rousseau  Law  on  Associations   (special  provisions  for 
Religious  Orders). 

1903  Authorization  required  under  Waldeck-Rousseau  Law  refused  by 

Premier  Combes.     Unauthorized  Orders  dissolved. 
POPE  Pius  X. 
Geay  and  Le  Nordez  affairs. 

1904  April  24.     Visit  of  President  Loubet  to  Rome. 
April  28.     Protest  of  the  Pope. 

July  7.     Law  against  Teaching:  Orders. 

July  30.     Diplomatic  relations  with  Rome  severed. 

1905  July  3.     Separation  Law. 

1906  February  11.     Pope's  protest  against  Separation  Law  (Vehemen- 

ter  Noa). 

April.     Montagninl  Papers  published. 

May  30  to  June  1.     Plenary  Assembly  of  French  Bishops. 
Troubles  caused  by  Inventories. 

1907  January    2.     New    Law,    under    which    much    Church    Property 

forfeited. 
Encyclical  PaacendA,  against  the  Modernists. 


CONCLUSION 

Taking  stock — Liabilities:  (1)  The  falling  birth-rate — (2)  War 
danger  and  militarism — (3)  Alcoholism — (4)  Bourgeois  pettiness — 
( 5 )  A  divided  soul ;  latent  civil  war ;  fits  of  fanaticism  and  cynical 
indifference. 

Assets:  The  heritage:  (1)  European  France — (2)  The  Colonial 
Empire— (3)  Hoarded  capital — (4)  Cultural  traditions — (5)  Pres- 
tige— (6)  Evidences  of  undiminished  vitality. 

How  does  France  stand  in  this  the  second  decade  of  the 
twentieth  century?  Is  she  a  wounded  nation  slowly  bleeding 
to  death,  or  still  the  pioneer  of  the  Western  world?  To  this 
tremendous  question  we  shall  not  attempt  to  give  any  direct 
answer.  We  shall  simply  pass  in  review  the  problems  modern 
France  has  to  face,  her  assets  and  liabilities  in  the  universal 
struggle  for  life. 

First  in  the  debit  column  we  should  place  the  falling  birth- 
rate. France,  some  prophets  of  evil  assert,  will  soon  become  a 
second-rate  Power.  France  is  in  danger  of  losing  her  national 
identity.  We  think  that  this  peril  has  been  exaggerated.  There 
is  no  actual  decrease  in  the  population  of  France  from  census  to 
census;  only  the  increase  is  exceedingly  small.  There  is  no 
proof  whatever  that  this  stagnation  is  due  to  racial  decay.  The 
phenomenon  is  practically  universal  among  civilized  nations.  If 
there  is  room  in  France  for  more  people,  without  lowering  the 
standard  of  life,  more  will  come  from  other  parts  of  Europe.  The 
unity  of  France  is  geographical  and  cultural,  not  racial.  If 
France  should  close  her  frontiers  against  immigration,  or  if 
foreigners  came  in  large,  homogeneous,  unassimilable  hordes, 
then  the  danger  would  be  great.  Nothing  of  the  kind  is  taking 
place.  Should  the  population  of  France  remain  absolutely 
stationary,  it  would  still  be  large  enough  to  maintain  an  inde- 
pendent culture  second  to  none.  In  everything  that  is  worth 


CONCLUSION  293 

while  mere  numbers  avail  little.  The  England  of  Elizabeth  was 
a  pigmy  compared  with  China  or  the  modern  Eussian  Empire. 

Only  in  the  hypothesis  of  a  single-handed  conflict  with 
Germany  would  France's  limited  population  place  her  at  a 
disadvantage.  Other  things  being  equal,  65,000,000  have  a 
better  chance  to  win  than  39,000,000.  This  leads  us  to  the 
second  danger  that  overshadows  France :  the  constant  possibility 
of  war.  This  is  a  moral  as  well  as  a  material  danger :  it  warps 
her  thought  and  hampers  her  progress.  More  insidious,  costlier 
than  war,  without  any  of  war's  redeeming  features,  such  as  they 
may  be,  militarism  is  weighing  the  country  down.  Every 
Frenchman,  the  young  scientist  at  a  critical  moment  in  his 
studies  as  well  as  the  man  with  the  hoe,  is  sentenced  thereby  to 
three  years  of  that  barrack  life  which,  to  many,  is  no  better  than 
penal  servitude.  The  country,  we  are  told,  is  growing  richer 
in  spite  of  the  ever-increasing  burden.  But  how  long  will  the 
thrift  and  toil  of  the  people  keep  pace  with  that  abysmal  waste  ? 
A  nation  whose  population  does  not  increase,  and  whose  natural 
resources  are  incapable  of  sudden  expansion,  cannot  spend  billions 
on  social  improvements  and  on  armaments  for  ever ;  it  is  burning 
the  candle  at  both  ends.  When  it  comes  to  a  choice — and  the 
hour  cannot  be  long  deferred — will  the  French  decide  to  protect 
themselves  against  the  problematical  aggressions  of  neighbours 
with  whom  they  have  lived  at  peace  for  over  forty  years,  or 
against  ever-present,  relentless  foes — ignorance,  disease,  want, 
and  crime?  A  small  portion  of  the  population  is  affected  with 
chauvinistic  hysteria,  and  clamours  for  revenge;  another  is 
haunted  with  unreasoning  fear;  a  third  suffers  from  civic 
cowardice  and  dares  not  speak  out  its  candid  opinion;  a  fourth 
seems  to  champion  international  peace  in  the  sole  interest  of 
social  war.  But  a  growing  number  of  men  in  all  walks  of  life 
see  the  .criminal  folly  of  militarism,  and  the  possibility  of  check- 
ing its  further  growth.  France  is,  next  to  America,  the  great 
'Power  in  which  the  pacifist  movement  is  strongest.  Even  in  this 
dark  hour  there  is  a  gleam  of  hope. 

The  third  menace  is  alcoholism.  France,  the  country  of  wine, 
could  not  be  called  an  alcoholic  nation.  The  change,  a  compara- 
tively recent  one,  is  ascribed  to  the  growth  of  the  cities,  and  to 


294     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

conscription.  The  ruin  of  the  French  vineyards  by  the  phylloxera 
pest  is  also  said  to  have  demoralized  the  market  and  favoured 
the  sale  of  noxious  or  adulterated  products.  In  1881,  with  the 
triumph  of  the  Republican  party,  alas !  and  at  the  very  moment 
when  national  education  was  organized,  all  restrictions  as  to  the 
number  of  saloons  or  public-houses  were  removed,  and  France 
was  soon  covered  with  dram-shops.  Then  the  alcohol  distilled  at 
home  for  private  consumption  is  free  from  excise  duties:  a  tre- 
mendous premium  to  intemperance.  As  a  result,  the  country-side 
is  often  worse  than  the  city  slums.  Finally,  absinthe  has 
wrought  havoc  among  men  too  high  in  the  social  scale  for 
common  drunkenness — professional  men,  business  men,  Govern- 
ment employees,  army  officers?  .  .  .  What  is  to  be  done?  The 
innumerable  company  of  bar-keepers  and  home  distillers  *  are 
the  ruling  power  in  the  land.  Even  absinthe,  denounced  as  a 
poison  by  the  highest  medical  authorities,  is  still  freely  retailed. 
A  prohibition  law  passed  by  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  was  emas- 
culated by  the  Senate  so  as  to  exclude  only  one  of  the  components 
of  the  drug;  and  people  will  now  indulge  more  freely  in  that 
subtle  destroyer  of  health,  will,  and  reason  under  the  false 
impression  that  it  has  been  made  innocuous.  The  situation  is 
growing  worse:  France  stands  next  to  Denmark  in  the  per 
capita  consumption  of  alcohol.  But  the  upper  classes  are  con- 
verted to  temperance.  Education,  the  development  of  sports 
and  outdoor  exercises,  are  swelling  the  ranks  of  the  total 
abstainers,  who,  a  generation  ago,  were  ridiculed  as  fanatics, 
milksops,  or  freaks.  So  there  is  a  double  process  going  on: 
alcoholism  is  spreading  among  the  working  classes,  temperance 
will  soon  rule  above.  Sooner  or  later  the  people  imitate  the 
virtues  as  well  as  the  vices  of  their  social  superiors;  the  evil 
may  thus  increase  to  a  maximum,  then  the  ebb  tide  will  be  felt. 
At  least  we  fervently  hope  so,  for  the  health  and  sanity  of  a 
great  nation. 

A  fourth  danger  is  timidity :  pettiness,  narrow  individualism, 
wasteful  routine,  in  business  and  in  matters  of  general  policy — 
in  other  words,  the  oppressive  anarchy  of  dull  incompetence. 
This  is  the  result  of  disunion.  There  are  no  universally  accepted 

•  Bouilleurs  de  cm. 


CONCLUSION  295 

principles,  no  final  arbiters,  no  sense  of  discipline,  no  respect  for 
authority.  The  executive  is  annihilated;  the  omnipotent  legis- 
lature is  in  the  hands  of  parochial  politicians  hypnotized  by  the 
thought  of  re-election.  Appropriations  are  frittered  away  on 
partial  improvements,  generally  outgrown  before  they  are  com- 
pleted, whilst  schemes  of  truly  national  import  are  simply 
ignored.  The  theoretical  radicalism  of  the  French  does  not  pre- 
vent them  from  falling  into  the  worst  kind  of  "  opportunism  " 
— a  pennywise,  hand-to-mouth  policy.  The  economic  equipment 
of  France  is  permanently  obsolete,  although  costly;  her  social 
legislation  is  intricate  and  timid ;  the  fight  against  national  evils 
— alcoholism,  tuberculosis,  pornography — is  half-hearted.  Busi- 
ness lacks  enterprise:  the  small  workshop,  the  small  store  still 
prevail,  with  their  limited  outlook  and  antiquated  methods. 
France  is  still  wonderfully  rich;  but  real  wealth  is  not  a  hoard 
of  precious  metal,  it  is  the  capacity  of  producing  and  consuming, 
and  in  this  respect  France  is  not  leading  in  the  race.  The 
French  may  have  a  heavier  purse  than  the  Germans,  but  Ger- 
many is  adding  proportionally  more  to  the  actual  riches  of  the 
world.  The  experience  of  the  Second  Empire  shows  that  this 
defect  is  not  inherent  in  the  French  character:  the  deadlock  of 
creeds  and  parties  has  brought  about  a  paralysis  of  the  collective 
will.  A  divided  nation  cannot  even  buy  and  sell  with  business- 
like precision.  Socialism,  Imperialism,  plutocracy  on  the  grand 
scale  would  be  better  for  the  purse  and  even  for  the  spirit  of 
France  than  this  dead  level  of  bourgeois  pettiness. 

The  history  of  France  in  the  nineteenth  century  is  the  tragedy 
of  a  nation  with  a  divided  soul.  This  is  no  immemorial  curse, 
no  taint  in  the  blood  of  the  people.  For  eight  hundred  years 
the  French,  proud  of  their  common  heritage,  had  remained 
remarkably  loyal  to  their  dynasty  and  to  their  faith.  Unity 
was  their  ideal,  and  they  had  achieved  it  earlier  and  more 
completely  than  any  other  nation.  N"or  was  the  reform  spirit 
of  the  eighteenth  century  responsible  for  the  sudden  break  in  the 
country's  tradition.  Radical  though  they  were,  the  principles  of 
1789  were  the  term  of  a  long  evolution,  and  by  no  means  in- 
compatible with  constitutional  monarchy  or  with  the  Christian 
religion.  But  for  the  baleful  influence  of  his  wife  and  brothers, 


296     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

Louis  XVI  might  have  lived  and  died  the  beloved  sovereign  of 
regenerated  France.  Preventable  misunderstandings  and  crimes 
brought  about  the  terrible  events  of  the  Revolution,  which  in 
their  turn  created  a  chasm  between  the  old  world  and  the  new. 
Sharp  and  constant  opposition  between  progressives  and  conser- 
vatives, in  every  political  body  and  in  every  Church,  may  be  a 
condition  of  normal  life.  But  France  lives  in  the  dread  of 
radical  reaction  or  revolution,  in  an  atmosphere  of  latent 
civil  war. 

This  is  especially  evident  in  politics.  Within  the  span  of  one 
man's  life — Guizot,  for  instance — France  has  known  eleven 
different  regimes,  and  none  was  ever  felt  to  be  permanent  and 
secure.  Even  the  government  most  unequivocally  endorsed  by 
the  quasi-unanimity  of  the  people,  the  Second  Empire,  remained, 
in  the  eyes  of  an  irreconcilable  minority,  a  criminal  adventure, 
bound  to  end,  as  it  eventually  did,  in  shame  and  disaster.  After 
forty-three  years  of  Republic,  many  of  the  ablest  thinkers  in 
France  profess  monarchical  ideas,  and  are  openly  working  for 
the  overthrow  of  the  regime.  The  crisis  opened  in  1789  is  not 
yet  over.  Republics,  empires,  kingships  are  makeshifts  and 
experiments  rather  than  final  solutions. 

This  prolonged  unstability  is  due  to  excessive  haste  and 
radicalism.  Although  every  regime  was  in  fact  a  compromise, 
none  was  willing  to  confess  its  own  precarious  and  "  pragmatic  " 
character ;  each  in  its  turn,  on  its  advent,  announced  that  "  the 
era  of  revolutions  was  closed  "  by  the  virtue  of  some  magic  prin- 
ciple. This  theoretical  intolerance  rejected  the  supporters  of 
rival  schemes  into  anti-constitutional  opposition.  Even  the 
government  of  Louis-Philippe,  the  most  eclectic  of  all,  did 
everything  to  irritate  the  Legitimists  and,  after  1840,  nothing 
to  placate  the  Democrats.  The  present  Republic  has  endured 
more  than  any  other  regime,  because,  for  many  years,  it  was 
frankly  provisional.  But,  since  1880,  it  has  fallen  into  the 
same  error  as  its  predecessors.  It  has  banished  the  Pretenders, 
whose  presence  in  France  was  an  element  of  national  reconcilia- 
tion. It  has  enacted  that  no  future  revision  of  the  Constitution 
could  alter  the  republican  form  of  government.  It  is  opposed 
to  the  direct  election  of  the  Chief  Magistrate,  to  the  referendum 


CONCLUSION  297 

and  plebiscite,  to  women's  suffrage,  and  even  to  proportional 
representation,  because,  forsooth,  these  methods  of  consulting 
the  people  might  endanger  the  stability  of  existing  institutions. 
In  other  words,  the  Republic  places  itself  above  democracy, 
whereas  it  ought  to  be  the  truest  embodiment  of  democracy. 
The  ghosts  of  legitimacy  and  absolutism  have  not  yet  been 
exorcised:  Marianne  believes  in  her  divine  right  as  sincerely 
as  Louis  XIV.  France  has  been  governed  by  many  parties : 
she  has  not  yet  tried,  unreservedly,  the  government  of  the 
people  by  the  people,  even  though  the  people  should  elect  to 
be  ruled  by  a  d'Orleans  or  a  Napoleon. 

The  same  unhappy  division  prevails  in  religious  matters. 
Instead  of  the  infinitely  varied  compound  of  individualism  and 
tradition  which  governs  the  faith  of  English-speaking  countries, 
we  find  in  France  two  rigid  and  mutually  exclusive  systems; 
Catholicism  can  no  more  admit  free-thought  than  free-thought 
can  tolerate  Catholicism.  Each  in  so  doing  would  be  untrue  to 
its  own  ideal.  The  accusations  of  hypocrisy,  superstition,  and 
wilful  spiritual  blindness  are  bandied  to  and  fro.  And  Christ- 
ianity is  distorted  so  as  to  teach  hatred:  and  free-thought  is 
warped  so  as  to  mean  intolerance. 

In  this  atmosphere  of  conflict,  every  new  problem  gives  rise  to 
passionate  antagonism.  A  century  ago,  though  the  "  throne 
and  the  altar  "  were  shaken,  the  Fatherland  and  property  were 
still  held  sacred.  To-day,  they  are  attacked  and  defended  with 
the  same  fury  as  formerly  the  Church  and  monarchy.  Thus 
new  wounds  are  inflicted  before  the  old  ones  have  time  to  heal. 

And  these  are  not  mere  word-battles,  but  grim  realities.  The 
Terrors  of  1793  and  1815,  the  Days  of  June,  1848,  the 
proscriptions  of  December,  1851,  the  Commune  and  the  repres- 
sion of  the  Commune  are  deep  red  stains  in  modern  French 
history/-  The  spirit  that  made  those  things  possible — the  frantic 
distrust  and  hatred,  the  wild  fanaticism — are  still  there,  and  may 
break  out  at  any  moment  in  that  fair  land  of  cheerful  toil, 
moderate  desires,  and  smiling  common  sense.  This  is  the  out- 
standing characteristic,  the  chief  paradox,  and  the  chief  weak- 
ness of  French  civilization. 

Any    sympathetic    observer    from    without    is    immediately 


298     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XlXxn  CENTURY 

impressed  with  the  futility  of  all  this  bitter  strife.  For  com- 
promise, after  all,  is  indispensable,  and  all  French  Governments 
in  the  past  century  have  been  compromises.  The  Restoration 
had  to  accept  the  essential  conquests  of  the  Revolution;  the 
present  Republic  keeps  the  constitution  framed  by  Legitimists 
and  Orleanists,  the  administration  established  by  Napoleon,  the 
social  order,  the  foreign  policy  of  the  old  monarchy.  There  has 
been  progress  under  the  most  reactionary  regime,  conservation 
under  the  most  radical.  One  cannot  but  feel  that  without  these 
spasmodic  efforts  to  rush  or  stem  the  course  of  history  things 
would  have  been  very  much  as  they  are.  In  spite  of  the  Red 
Terror  there  are  still  noblemen  and  Catholics.  In  spite  of 
Thiers's  ruthlessness  in  1871,  socialism  has  not  been  stamped 
out.  This  mighty  wrestling  for  abstract  principles  is  fine, 
dramatically  and  ethically,  even  though  its  material  results 
should  be  nil.  One  may  hold  that  the  blood  of  martyrs,  what- 
ever the  cause  for  which  it  is  shed,  is  never  shed  in  vain.  Yet 
the  waste  far  exceeds  the  gain.  Revolutionary  France  has  been 
an  "  awful  example "  as  well  as  a  pioneer.  What  a  few  ideas 
have  gained  in  apparent  clearness  they  have  lost  in  immediate 
applicability.  Neither  the  fear  nor  the  hope  of  cataclysmic 
changes  is  conducive  to  patient  endeavour.  And  worst  of  all 
this  splendid  and  impracticable  spirit  of  no-compromise,  which 
makes  heroes  and  saints,  leaves  the  common  herd  a  prey  to 
scepticism.  Because  some  will  take  all  things  tragically  maDy 
refuse  to  take  anything  seriously.  "  J'm'en  fichisme "  is  the 
complement  and  the  corrective  of  fanaticism,  and  in  the  interval 
between  two  revolutions  the  worst  radical  will  confess  that 
"  plus  ga  change,  plus  c'est  la  meme  chose." 

Without  any  thought  of  disparaging  the  fierce  earnestness  of 
the  French,  it  may  be  said  that  it  has  led  them  astray.  Not 
because  it  was  earnestness,  not  even  because  it  was  fierce;  but 
because  it  was  hastily  systematic  and  one-sided.  With  un- 
deniable courage  facts  have  been  ignored,  feelings  suppressed, 
personal  interests  sacrificed,  for  the  sake  of  certain  abstract  idols 
called  logic  and  consistency.  This  explains  but  a  small  part  of 
French  history,  but  it  explains  much  of  it  that  is  specifically 
French. 


CONCLUSION  299 

Barring  a  miracle,  no  synthesis  is  conceivable  that  would 
permanently  reconcile  all  the  warring  elements  of  French 
thought.  So  the  one  remedy  is  a  purely  negative  one:  old- 
fashioned  liberalism.  The  word  has  fallen  into  disrepute.  In 
politics,  in  sociology,  in  religion,  it  seems  to  stand  for  much 
that  is  half-hearted  and  ineffectual.  Liberty  is  nothing  in 
itself.  The  point  of  importance  is  what  is  done  with  it.  We 
take  liberalism  to  mean :  "  Strive  to  achieve  something  rather 
than  to  hamper  your  neighbour."  France  still  believes  in  repres- 
sive policies,  in  enforced  conformity.*  But  there  are  welcome 
promises  of  change.  The  creation  of  local  universities  with  a 
fair  amount  of  autonomy  was  a  step  in  the  right  direction,  and 
has  proved  admirably  successful.  The  Separation  law,  in  spite 
of  minor  mistakes,  was  truly  a  liberal  measure.  Strange  to  say, 
there  are  in  syndicalism,  with  all  its  coarse  violence,  precious 
elements  of  liberation :  from  the  tyranny  of  capitalists,  from  the 
tyranny  of  bureaucrats,  from  the  tyranny  of  politicians,  from  the 
tyranny  of  majorities.  The  collapse  of  the  old  spirit  of  system 
is  setting  free  vast  reserves  of  energy  hitherto  wasted  in  mutual 
check.  Already  we  hear  much  less  talk  about  reason,  and  much 
more  about  intuition,  faith,  and  life.  It  is  still  mostly  talk. 
But  "  words  are  seeds  that  grow  to  deeds." 

These,  according  to  French  and  foreign  observers,  are  the 
dangers  which  beset  France.  We  have  stated  the  facts,  with 
reluctance,  but  without  fear,  because  we  believe  them  to  be 
true.  Fortunately,  they  tell  but  half  of  the  story,  and  we  shall 
now  enumerate  the  assets  of  France. 

First  of  all,  her  inherited  wealth  of  land,  money,  culture,  and 
prestige.  France  is  an  old  nation:  Caesar  brought  her  within 
the  pale  of  Western  culture  two  thousand  years  ago.  A  hundred 
years"  later  she  had  forged  to  the  very  front,  and  has  kept  there 
ever  since,  fighting  and  wasting  plentifully,  but  also  hoarding 
and  learning. 

The  area  of  European  France  is  small,  as  modern  "world- 
powers  "  go.  The  fertility  of  her  soil  is  not  exceptional.  •  She 

•At  the  time  of  writing:,  the  Barthou  Ministry  is  trying  to  cudgel 
patriotism  into  the  proletariat 


300     FRENCH  CIVILIZATION  IN  XIXiH  CENTURY 

has  no  precious  minerals,  and  not  enough  coal  to  meet  the 
demand  of  her  industries.  But  the  country  is  wonderfully  varied 
and  well  balanced,  responsive  to  good  cultivation,  pleasant  to 
inhabit,  situated  on  the  highways  of  commerce,  in  the  very  heart 
of  modern  civilization. 

Then  there  is  the  colonial  Empire,  which  has  grown  to  such 
huge  dimensions  within  the  last  third  of  a  century.  This  Empire 
is  second  in  size  to  none  but  those  of  England  and  Russia,  and 
although  it  includes  the  Sahara  desert,  its  inhabitable  portions  are 
probably  as  extensive  as  the  areas  of  corresponding  fertility  in 
the  United  States.  The  value  of  this  asset  is  hard  to  determine : 
the  Empire  is  still  in  the  making.  Speaking  with  due  circum- 
spection, we  should  say  that  Indo-China,  if  it  be  long  retained, 
will  prove  a  responsibility  rather  than  a  source  of  strength;  that 
Madagascar,  unless  her  long-heralded  mineral  wealth  turns  out  at 
last  to  be  a  reality,  is  not  a  country  of  unlimited  promise;  that 
Western  Africa,  with  the  finest  races  in  the  Dark  Continent,  may 
become  as  prosperous  as  the  Southern  United  States.  All  these 
are  possessions,  Northern  Africa  alone  is  an  extension  of  France. 
There  are  already  a  million  Europeans  in  Algeria,  Tunis,  and 
Morocco;  and  the  native  Berbers  are  recognized  by  all  ethnolo- 
gists to  be  pure  Europeans.  If  the  selfish  proclivities  of  the 
colonists  are  not  curbed,  these  lands  will  remain  scenes  of  hatred 
and  conflict;  if  the  wiser  counsels  of  European  France  prevail, 
if  education  is  spread  among  the  natives,  who  are  eager  for  it, 
the  Berbers  and  even  the  Arabs  will  soon  be,  not  assimilated, 
but  reconciled,  associated,  with  the  French.  And  this  would 
open  magnificent  vistas. 

France  is  a  capitalist  among  nations.  The  thrift  and  foresight 
of  the  people  have  led  to  the  accumulation  of  a  tremendous 
hoard.  Germany  found,  at  the  time  of  the  Agadir  crisis,  that 
the  "  woollen  stocking  "  of  the  French  peasantry  was  a  weapon 
mightier  than  her  sword.  France  levies  on  the  activities  of  the 
rest  of  the  world  a  yearly  toll  equal  to  her  military  expenditure. 

More  precious  than  gold  are  the  traditions  of  France — the  art 
treasures,  the  storied  cities  which  are  a  liberal  education,  the 
immemorial  uninterrupted  culture,  the  skill  and  taste  which 
these  cannot  fail  to  breed.  This  is  a  source  of  wealth  and 


CONCLUSION  301 

power  barely  equalled  by  any  European  nation,  and  which  we  of 
the  younger  West  must  shift  without  for  ages  to  come. 
.  Then,  growing  out  of  this  glorious  past,  comes  another  asset 
— the  prestige  of  France.  Tainted  with  Napoleonitis,  impaired 
by  the  disasters  of  1871,  distorted  and  smirched  by  indecent 
literature,  this  prestige  is  still  a  potent  factor,  and  makes 
France  the  second  home  of  every  man  of  culture. 

But  land,  money,  tradition,  prestige  would  be  things  of 
naught  if  the  people  had  lost  their  soul.  Their  wealth  would 
pass  into  stronger  hands,  their  culture  would  turn  to  rottenness 
and  their  prestige  to  contempt,  as  with  the  Greeks  of  Byzantium. 
Once,  about  twenty  years  ago,  the  French  themselves  wondered 
if  it  had  not  come  to  that.  The  cry  of  "  decadence  "  was  raised, 
by  malevolent  rivals,  by  sensationalists,  by  "  aesthetes  "  in  quest 
of  a  new  pose,  by  earnest  patriots  who  had  lost  their  star. 
When  a  belated  echo  of  this  cry  reaches  us  now,  how  faint  and 
strange  and  silly  it  sounds!  For  the  one  great  asset  of  the 
French  people  is  their  indomitable  vitality.  They  often  work 
at  cross-purposes,  and  the  results  are  not  adequate  to  the  energy 
and  the  ingenuity  displayed.  But,  even  in  wasteful  conflict,  one 
cannot  fail  to  admire  the  evidence  of  power.  In  the  twentieth 
century,  as  ever  before,  the  French  are  among  the  pioneers. 
It  is  not  merely  on  farces  and  fashions  that  they  imprint  their 
stamp,  imperiously;  but  on  new  industries  and  new  sciences 
like  automobiling,  submarine  navigation,  aeronautics,  radio- 
activity; on  new  forms  of  social  thought,  like  syndicalism;  on 
new  philosophies,  like  Bergsonism. 

I  do  not  see  France  as  a  goddess,  austere  and  remote:  I  see 
her  intensely  human,  stained  with  indecencies  and  blasphemies, 
scarred  with  innumerable  battles,  often  blinded  and  stumbling 
on  the  way,  but  fighting  on,  undismayed,  for  ideals  which  she 
cannot  always  define.  An  old  nation?  A  wounded  nation? — 
Perhaps ;  but  her  mighty  heart  is  throbbing  with  unconquerable 
life. 


INDEX 


About,  B.,  132 
Ackermann,  Mme.,  144 
Affre,  Mgr.,  269 
Albert,  201 
Albigensians.  23 
ALCOHOLISM,  293-4 
Alexander  I,  93,  96 
Alfonso  (d'),  69 
ALGESIA — 

Conquest,  106 

Jewish  problem,  285  n 

Native  problem,   800 
Allemanlsts,  207 
ALSACE-LORRAINE,   28,   35,   151, 

166 

A  mi  el,  144 
Amiens,  peace  of,  56 
Ammon,  31,  33 
Ampere,  231 
Andre,  General,  173 
Angell,  Norman,  160 
Angouleme,  Duke  of,  195 
ANTHROPOLOGY,  32-5 
ANTHROPOSOCIOLOOY,  26 
Arago,  79,  194,  198 
Arlincourt,  82 
ABUT,  the  Grand,  63 
Arnault,  81 
Artols,    Count   of,    91,    96,    112 

Charles  X) 

ASSOCIATION  LAW,  273 
Attlla,   23 
Augagneur,  209 
Augereau,  51 

Augler,  114,  119,   132,   136,  145 
Aulard,  198 

Aumale,  Duke  of,  106,  113 
AVARS,  29 
L'Avenir,  264 
Aynard,  207 

Babbitt,  I.,  80 

Baboeuf,  BABOUVISM,  47,  81. 187. 

Bakounine,  204,  206,  206,  214 

Ballanche,  262 

Balzac,  110,  111,  112,  136 

BANK  OF  FRANCB,  77 

Banville,  145 


156, 


(cf. 


193 


302 


Baour-Lormian,  81 

Barante,  de,  108 

Barbes,  107,  126,  193 

Bardoux,  J.,  251 

Barnl,  237 

Barnum,  57 

Ban-as,  61,  73 

Barrault,   267 

Barres,  M.,  180,  279 

Barriere,  Th.,  136 

Barthelemy-Saint-Hilaire,  237 

Barthou,  299  n 

Basly,  210 

BASQUES,  cephalic  index,  33 ;  lan- 
guage, 27 ;  origins,  29 

Baudelaire,  131,  146,  181 

Baudry.  P.,  145 

Bautain,  278 

Bazaine,  154,  155 

Bazard,  286 

Becque.  H.,  40,  179 

Belgrand,  168 

Bell,  232 

Bellac,  232 

Belloc,  H.,  134 

Beranger,  80.  109,  114,  119,  128,  179. 
263,  286 

Berlioz,  115 

Bernadotte,  57 

Bernard,  C.,  146,  238 

Berry,  Duchess  of,  103 

Berry,  Duke  of,  96,  112,  196 

Berryer,  108 

Bert,  P.,  238,  240 

Berthelot,  M.,  146,  238 

Berthier,  67 

Berthollet,  79 

Bertin,  109 

Beugnot,  69 

Beyle,  111 

Bietry.  281 

Bigot  de  Preameneu,  66 

Biot,  231 

Bismarck,  152,  159.  167,  214 

Blanc,  L,.,  126,  198-9,  201 

Blanqui.  107,  126,  193.  206 

BLOCKADE,  Continental,  77 

Blondel,  279 


INDEX 


"  BLOODY  WEEK,"  158 
Bodln,  Jean,  17 
Bodley.  J.  C.,  36,  65 
Boileau,  80,  82 
Boilly,   80 
Boissonade,  231 
Bonald,  84,  117,  262 
Bonaparte,  Joseph,  74,  91 
Bonaparte,  Louis,  74 
Bonaparte,  Lucien,  93 

BONAPARTISM,    131,    214 

Bordeaux,  Duke  of,  96  (cf.  Cham- 
bord,  Henri  V) 

Bossuet,  46 

Boucher,  78,  80 

Boucicaut,   210 

Boufflers,  78 

Boulainvilliers,  31 

Boulanger,  BOULANGISM,  166,  206 

Bouquet  de  la  Grye,  168 

Bouquier,  49 

BourbaW,  166 

Bourgeois,  E.,  136 

Bourgeois,  L.,  162,  210,  246 

Bourgeois  Monarchy,  cf.  Louis- 
Philippe 

BOURGEOISIE,  44,  45,  61,  70,  102,  106, 
113-114,  126.  140,  156,  170,  173, 
175-8,  187-90,  201,  205,  206,  209, 
247,  257,  266,  295 

Bourget,  279 

Boutmy,  E.,  36,  240 

Brancas,  75 

Brazza.  167 

Breal,  284 

Briand,  162,  209,  276,  277 

Brifaut,   81 

Brinton,  34 

Brissot  de  Warville,  187 

BRITTANY,  20.  21,  23,  27 

Broglle,  V.  de.,  103,  108 

Broglie,  Duchess  of,  113 

Broglie,  A.  V.  de,  161,  163 

BROOK  FARM,  198 

Broussais,  61,  79 

Broussists,  207 

Brownell,  *6 

BRUMAIRB  18th,  51,  55,  66 

Brune,  50,  94 

Brunetiere.  181,  280  n 

Buckle,  17 

Buffon,  38 

Bugeaud,  124 

Buisson,  242,  282 

Buloz.  137 

Buonarotti,  193 

BUREAUCRACY,  68 


Bur  graves,  115 

BURGUNDIANS,    29 

Burke,  43 

Burnouf,  231 

Byron,  BYRONISM,  83,  99,  111,  116 

Cabanel,  138,  145 

Cabanis,  81 

Cabet,  198 

Caesar,  29,  32,  66,  237.  299 

Caffleri,  78 

Calvin,  38,  283 

Cambacfires,  66,  74 

Carapan,  Mme.,  75 

Campistron,  41 

CAPETIAN  dynasty,  23,  37,  44,  46 

CARBONARISM,  107 

Carlyle.  43 

Carnegie,  190 

Carnot,  Lazare,  62,  76,  79,  93 

Carnot,  Hippolyte,  235 

Carnot,  Sadi.  164 

Caro,  261,  286 

Carpeaux,  118,  142,  146 

Carrel,  A.,  109 

Castellane,  General  de,  202 

Catinat,  46 

Cauchy,  231 

Cavaignac,    E.,    126,    127,    128,    134, 

202 

Cavaignac,  G.,  171 
Cav6,  210 
CEMTBERIANS,  29 
CELTIC  QUESTION,  32 
Chalgrin,  82 
Challemel-Lacour,  287 
Cham.  138 

Chamberlain,  H.  S.,  26,  31.  32,  35 
Chambord,  Count  of,  96,  161 
CHAMBRE  INTROUVABLE,  94 
Channing,  233 
Chanzy,  155,  156 
Chapelier,  188,  192,  211 
CHAPPE  TELEGRAPHY,  115 
Chaptal,  224 
Charbonnel,  181,  287 
Charlemagne,  261 
Charles  Martel,  23,  29 
Charles  II  of  England,  180 
CHARLES  X,  96,  98,  99,  101,  102,  105, 

109,  112,  120,  125,  161,  182,  234, 

263.  264  (cf.  Count  of  Artois) 
Charlet,   69 
Charras,  141 
Chateaubriand,   44,   78,   83.   84.  113. 

116,  116,  117,  119,  262,  265 
Chatel,  285 


304 


INDEX 


Chenedolle,  83 

Chgnier,  M.  J.,  69,  81 

Cheret,  A.,  46 

Chevallier.  M.,  139 

Chevert,  46 

Choiseul,  75 

CLASSICAL  SCHOOL — 
under  Napoleon  I,   80—2 
under  Louis-Philippe,  118-19 

Clemenceau,    G.,    49,    165,    166,    172, 
182,  206 

Clermont,  136 

Clovis,  23,  260 

Cobden,  139 

Cochin,  A.,  257 

CODES,  Napoleon's,  66-7,  190-1 

Coignet,  59,   60,   61 

Colani,  282 

Colbert,  45,  75,  139 

COLLEGE  DE  FRANCE,  223,    227 

Colliard,  209 

COLONIAL  EXPANSION,  167,  300 

Combes,  E.,  230,   241,  246,  274,  275, 

286 
COMMUNE,  157-9,  178,  205,  271,  297, 

298 

COMPAONONNAGES,    114,    191-2 

Comte,  A.,  116,  143,  146,  199,  285 

CONCORDAT  of  1802,  258-62,  271,  273, 
274-5 

Concordat  of  1813,  261,  262 

Concordat  of  1817,  263 

Condillac,  81,  119 

CONDITION  of  France  in  1799,  49-61 

Condorcet,  79,  223 

"  CONGREGATION,"  98,  182 

CONSCRIPTION  under  Napoleon,  63 

Considerant,  V.,  198 

Constant,  B.,  69,  83,  92,  108 

CONSTITUTIONS — 
Napoleon  I,  70 

Constitutional  Charter,  91,  102 
Constitution  of  1848,  127-9 
Constitutional    evolution    of    the 

2nd  Empire,  134  » 
Constitution  of  1875,  162  n 

CONSTITUTIONAL  CHURCH,  257-9 

Coquerel,  A.,  282 

Corneille,  119 

Cornet,  182 

Corot,  146 

Cortot,  118 

Corvisart,  79 

COUP  D'ETAT  (1799),  61.  56,  56 

COUP  D'ETAT  (1861),  129,  131 

Courbet,  146 

Courier,  P.  L..  109,  263 


COURT — 

Napoleon  I,  73-5 

Restoration,  112 

Louis-Philippe,  113 

Napoleon  III,  141 

Cousin,  V.,  108,  114,  119,  143,  229, 
230,  231,  233,  234,  235,  236,  237, 
286 

Cousin  de  Grainville,  83 
Creuze  de  Lesser,  82,  83 
Cro  Magnon  RACE,  34  n 
Cromwell,  56 
Cuvier,  79,  80,  229,  231 

Dancourt,  80 

Dandin,  George,  75 

Danton,  156 

Darmesteter,  A.  and  J.,  284 

Darwin,  DARWINISM,  146,  181,  286 

Daubigny,  145 

Daudet,  137,  143 

Daumier,  138 

Daunou,  231 

David,  80,  82,  84 

David  d' Angers,  118 

Davout,  67.  75,  93 

Davy,  Humphry,  80 

DECADENCE?  41-2,  180-1,  301 

Decazes,  95,  113 

DECLARATION  OF  1682,  46,  260 

Degerando,  81 

Deherme,  251 

Delacroix,  115,  119 

Delaroche,  P.,  119 

Delavigne,  C.,  119 

Delille,  81,  83 

Demolins,  L.,  36,  181 

Denfert-Rochereau,  156 

Denlker,  34 

Derembourg,  284 

Desaix,  57 

Dfesaugiers,  80 

Descartes,  286 

Deschanel,  E..  251 

Deschanel,  P..  207,  210 

Desgarets,  234 

Desjardins,  P.,  181 

Destutt  de  Tracy,  81 

Detaille,  69 

Diderot,  46,  78 

DIRECT  ACTION,  213 

Disderi,  138 

Dreyfus,  DREYFUS  CASE,  30,  39,  169- 

72,    181-2,   207-8,   241,   243,   251, 

273.  279,  282,  286,  287 
Drumont,  E.,  30,  284,  286 
Duchesne,  Mgr.,  279 


INDEX 


305 


Duels,  83 

Ducrot,  164 

Duez,   274 

Dufaure,  206 

Dumas,  A.,  pere.   119,  128.  145,  146 

Dumas,  A.,  fils,  136,  146 

Dumouriez,   156 

Dunant,  178 

Dupanloup,  236,  238,  270 

Du  Paty  de  Clam,  172 

Dupre,   146 

Dupuy,  212 

Dupuytren,   79 

Duras,  Duchess  of,  113 

Duruy,  V.,  182,  237-9,  246 

Duval,   80 

Duvergier  de  Hauranne,  127 

Elizabeth,  293 
Emerson,  181,  233,  287 
ENCYCLICAL — 

Mirari  vos,  265 

Quanta  Cura,  270 

Rerum  Novarum,  272 

Pascendi,  279 

Enfantin,  P.,   139,  196,  267,  285 
Enferme,  L'   (Blanqui),  107 
Enghien,  Duke  of,  71 
ENVIRONMENT,  theory  of,  17-18 
"  Epopee,"  L',  67 
Erckmann-Chatrian,    126 
Esterhazy,   169 
ETHNOGRAPHY,  28-32 
Eugenie   (Empress),  133,   141 
EXPOSITIONS,     1855-67,     147;     1878, 
160;  1889,  166 

Fabert,  46 

Faidherbe,   155,   156 

Fallieres.   210 

Falloux,  de.  137,  235,  236,  240,  269 

Familistere  de  Guise,  198,  210 

FASHODA,  167 

Fauchet,   187 

Faure,  F.,  165,  172 

Fenelon,   251 

Ferry,  Jules,  165,  167,  168,  169,  230, 

239.  240,  245,  286 
FEUDALISM  abolished,  186,  188 
Feuillet,   136 
Fieschi,   109 
Filon.   133 
Finot,   40 
Flandrin,  138 
Flaubert,    131,    132,    143,    144,    145, 

146,   286 
Flechler,  46 


FLEMISH  language,  27 

Fonsegrive,  279 

Fontaine,  82 

Fontanes,  83 

Fortoul,   237 

Fouche,  57,  71,  93,  111 

Fouillee,  36 

Fourcroy,  79,  224 

Fourier,  196-8 

Fourtou,    161 

Foy,  General,  108 

Fragonard,   78 

France,  A.,  38,  180,  208,  246 

Francis  I,  46 

FRANKFORT,  treaty  of,  156 

Franklin,  46,  286 

FRANKS,  29 

Frayssinous,  Mgr.  de,  230,  233 

FREEMASONRY,  274  n 

Freppel,  Mgr.,  240,  278 

Freycinet,  168 

Fromentin,  145 

Fustel  de  Coulanges,  31 

Galliffet,  General  de,  172,  208 
Gambetta,    44,    166,    157,    163,    205, 

211,  240,  271 
Garat,  81 
Gamier,  Ch.,  145 
Gasparin,  A.  de,  282 
GAULS,  29 

Gautier,  Th.,  117,  145 
Gavarni,  138 
Gavorche,  36 
Gay-Lussac,  79,  231 
Geffrey,  G..  107 
GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOUR 

(C.G.T.),  212 

Genie  du  Christianiame,  262 
Genin,   266 
Geoffrey,  81 

Geoffroy-Saint-Hilaire,  79,  231 
GEOGRAPHY  of  France,  17-26 
Gerard.  84 
Gericault,  59,  84 
Gessner,  83 
Gide,   210 
Girard,  Ph.  de,  77 
Girardin,  E.  de,  109 
Godin.   198 
Goethe,  83,  116 
Goncourt,  E.  J.  de,  136,  145 
Gontaut,  76 
Goriot,  110 
Gouthieres,  78 
Gouvion-Saint-Cyr,  95 
Gramont,  75 


306 


INDEX 


Gratry.  178,  270,  278,  280 

Greard,  242 

"  Great  Illusion,"  160 

GREEKS  in  France,  29 

Grfegoire,  69,  96 

Gregory  XVI,  265 

Grfevy,  J.,  162,  164 

Gros,  59.  84 

Grouchy,  93 

GUARD,  Imperial,  58 

GuSrard,  210  n 

Gueroult,  137,  204 

Guesde,  207 

GUILDS  abolished,  188 

Guiton  de  Morveau,  79 

Guizot,  103,  104-5,  108,  124,  136, 
140,  143,  229,  230,  231,  233,  234, 
237,  239,  245,  266,  282,  296 

Guys,  Constantin,  138 


Haeckel,  286 

Halevy,  38,  136,  142,  145 

Hanotaux,  159,  160 

Hargenvilliers,  d',   64 

Haussmann,  238,  147 

Havet,  137 

Havin,  137 

Hedouville,  51,  76 

Hegel,  119,  146,  231,  286 

Hello,   147,   270 

Henri  IV,  25,  45 

"  Henri  V,"  101,  161 

Henry,  Col.,  171 

Hippocrates,  17 

Hoche,  50,  51,  57,  62,  76 

Hodde,  de  la,  107 

Homais,  M.,   183,   281,  286 

Homme  fort.  111,  142-3 

Hortense,  Queen,  82 

Houdetot,  Mme.  d',  78 

Houtln,  279,  280 

Hugo,  Victor,  83,  110,  113,  115,  117, 
119,  128,  130,  132.  134.  141,  145, 
146,  151,  159,  194,  262,  267 

Human  Comedy,  110-12 

Humann,  103 

HUNDRED  DATS,  92-3 

HUNS,  29 

Htitten,  U.  von,  144 

Huxley,  286 


Ibsen,  181 
IDEOLOGISTS,  81-2 
INFALLIBILITY,  Papal,  270,  272 
Ingres,  118.  119 


INTERNATIONAL  Working-men's  As- 
sociation, 204-5 
Isabey,  80 


Jacquard,  77 

James,  W.,  182,  279 

Japy,  281  n 

Jaures,  J.,  187.  207,  208,  209 

Jecker,  142 

JESUITS,  98,  223,  230,  234,  263,  266, 

272 

JEWS,  30,  33,  283,  284,  285 
Joinville,  Prince  of,  106 
Jordan,  C.,  108 
Josephine,  73,  75,  76 
Joubert,  51 
Jourdain,  M..  176 
JUNE,  days  of,  1848 :  126,  127,  269, 

297 


Kant,  146,  231,  286 
Kellermann,   156 
Keufer,  212 
Kleber,  57 
Klopstock,  83 
Kock,  P.  de.  119 
Kropotkin,  206,  214 
Krupp,   190 

Labedoyere,  94 

Laberthonni£re.  279 

Labiche,  80 

Lacgpede,  79,  80 

Lacordaire,  126,  136,  140,  233,  264, 

265,  266,  269,  270 
Lagnnec,  79 
Laf argue,  206 

Lafayette,  50,  62,  76,  93,  101,  102 
La  Feuillade,  75 
Lafontaine,  36,  38 
Lagrange,  79 
Laharpe,  81 
Laine,  93 
Lalande,  79 
Lamarck,  79 
Lamartine,    83,    104,    105,    108,    115, 

117,    118,    125,    126,     127,     128, 

194,  201.  262,  267 
Lamennals,  117,  118,  134,  194,  230, 

233,  262,  264,  265,  267,  280 
Lancaster,  232 
Lanclval,  L.  de,  81 
Lanfrey,  137 
LANGUAGE,  26-8 
Lanjulnais,  93 


INDEX 


307 


Lannes  de  Montebello,  75 

Laplace,  79 

Lapouge,  Vacher  de,  26,  31,  181  n 

Laprade,  de,  137 

La  Rochefoucauld,  40 

La  Roche jacquelein,  269 

Laromiguifire,  81 

Larrey,  79 

Lassalle,  General,  59 

Lassus,  115 

Lavigerie,  278 

Lavoisier,  79,  224 

Lebceuf,  153 

Le  Bon,  G.,  26,  36,  181,  215 

Lebrun,  "  Pindar,"  81 

Lebrun,  Consul,  etc.,  69,  74 

Leclaire,   210 

Leclerc,   231 

Leconte  de  Lisle,  131,  132,  138,  144, 

145 

Ledru-Rollin,   128 
Lefebvre.  Marshal,  75 
Lefuel,  146 
Legendre,   79 
Legouve,  81 

Lemaltre,  J.,  180,  251,  279 
Lemire,  Abbe,  280 
Lenoir,  Richard,  77 
Leo   XIII,    166,    169,    272,    275,    278, 

279 

Lepeletier  de  Saint  Fargeau,  49,  223 
Le  Play,  147,  210,  280 
Leroux,  P.,  119,  210,  267 
Le  Roy,  279 
Lesage,   40 
Lesseps,  de,  196 
Letourneur,   83 
Leverrier,   146 
Lezay-Marnesia,  225 
Liard,  224,  235,  248 
"  Libre  Parole,"  La,  30,  284 
Libri,   266 

Lichtenberger,  H.,  187 
Littre,  143,  146,  238,  286 
Loisy,  279,  280 
Loliee,  143  n 
Loth,  250 

Loubet,"E.,  172.  210,  275 
Louis,  Paul,  192 

Louis  IX  (Saint  Louis),  152,  261 
Louis  XIV,  22,  44,  45,  49,  69,  72,  73, 

78,  112,   113,  157.  297 
Louis  XV,  45,  80,  152 
Louis  XVI.  45,  48,  76.  80,  229,  281, 

296 
Louis  XVIII,   91,   92,  94-5,  96.   112, 

229,  233,  259,  261 


LOUIS-PHILIPPE,  70,  100-9,  124,  135, 
127,  138,  140,  141.  161.  192,  201, 
211,  233,  242,  245.  264.  285,  296 

Loutchisky,  J.,  46 

Louvel,  96 

Loyson,  H.,  178.  270,  280,  285 
(Father  Hyacinthe) 

Lucrece,  119 

LUNEVILLE,  peace  of,  56 

LYONS  INSURRECTIONS,  115,  193 

Mabilleau,  210 

Mably.  187 

Macaire,  Robert,  109 

Mace,  J.,  238,  239 

MacMahon,  154,  158,  161-4,  165,  182 

Madame  Bans-Gene,  75 

Maeterlinck,  181 

Magnan,   130 

Maine  de  Biran,  84,  119 

Maintenon,  Mme.  de,  112 

Maistre,  J.  de,  84,  117,  262 

Maleville,  66 

MAMELUKS,  58 

Manet,   145 

Manuel,  108 

Mapah,  267 

Marcellin   (Planat),  138 

Marchand,  167 

Marchangy,  82 

Marco-Saint-Hilaire,  128 

Maret,  H.,  269,  278 

Margueritte,  P.  and  V.,  169 

Marie,  Princess  of  Orleans,  113 

Marie-Antoinette,  75.  100 

Marie-Louise,  75,  91 

"Marie-Louise"  (soldiers),  63 

MARSHALS,  74,  103,  106 

Martignac,  100,  108,  230 

Martin,  78 

Martin,  Henri,  31 

Marx,   K.,  MARXISM,   194,   204.   205, 

206,  207 

Massena,  60,  61.  93 
Massillon,  46 
Matilda,  Princess,  132 
Maumus,  279 
Maupas,  131 
Maurras,  279 

MAT,  16th  of,  163,  182,  271 
Meditations,  116 
Mehemet-Ali,  106 
Meilhac,  38,  136,  142,  145 
Meissonnier,  59,  138 
Meline,  J.,  165,  168,  218,  273 
Merlmee,   132 
Merlet,  82 


308 


INDEX 


Merry  del  Val,  Cardinal,  275 

Metternich.  266 

Metternich.  Princess  of,  141 

Meyer,  A.,  285 

Michaud,  82 

Michelet,    19,    22,    43,    83,    118,    133, 

145,  194,  233,  234,  237,  262,  266, 

267 

Mickiewicz,  233,  237 
Mignet,  231 

Millerand,  172,  207.  208,  209 
Millet,  145 
Millevoye,   83 

"  MILLIARD  DBS  EMIGRES,"  97 
Mirabeau,  187 
MODERNISM,  278-81 
Mole,  103,  108 
Moliere,  38,  40 
Moltke,  154 
Monge.  79 

Monk,  General,  56,  101 
Monod,  FrSd,  282 
Montagnini,  Mgr.,  275  n 
Montaigne,  38 
Montalembert,    108,    127,    135,    137, 

233,  234,  236,  264,  265,  266,  269, 

270 

Montesquieu,  17 
Montlosier,  263 
Montmorency,  75 
More,  Sir  T.,  198 
Moreau,  General,  51 
Morellet,  81 
Morelly,  187 
Morinaud,  285 
Morny.  Ill,  130,  131,  142-3 
Mun,  de,  207,  280  n 
Murat,  67,  69,  74 
Musset,  110,  117 


Nabob,  137 
Nadar,  138 

NAPOLEON     I,     37,     40,     61,     65-88; 
(Hundred  Days)   90-6,  99,  101, 
102;    "Return    of    the    ashes," 
106;  111,  113,  115,  120,  183 
Social  policy,  190-2,  197 
Educational  policy,  224-8,  233,  241 
Religious  policy,  267-62,  281.  283. 

297,   298 
NAPOLKON  III  (Louis  Napoleon),  76, 

82,  101,  106 
Strasbourg    and    Boulogne,     107, 

116,  120,  124-47 
War  of  1870,  160-5 
Social  policy.  202-3 


NAPOLEON  III,  continued — 

Educational  policy,  237-9,  242 
Religious  policy,  269-70 
Napoleon,  Prince,  132,  133,  135,  137, 

200,  204 
NAPOLEONIC  LEGEND:  Inception,  93- 

4,  128 

Napoleonitis,  57,  301 
NATIONAL     WORKSHOPS,     126,     199, 

201-2 

Nemours,  Duke  of,  104 
N6not,   249 
Nesselrode,  94 
Newton,  196 
Ney,  94 
Niel,  154 
Nietzsche,  214 
NOBILITY — 

Napoleonic,  74-6 

Old — under  Napoleon  I,  75 

under     the      Restoration     and 
Louis-Philippe,  112-13 

under  Napoleon  III,  140 

under  the  3rd  Republic,  174-5  n 
Nordau,  Max,  40,  181 
NORTHMEN,  29 
Novicow,  40 

Oberkampf,  77 

Obermann,  83 

O'Connell,   99 

Ollivier,  E.,  134 

Oppenord,  78 

Oppert,  284 

OPPORTUNIST  party,  165 

ORGANIC  ARTICLES,  260,  263 

Origins  of  Contemporary  France,  179 

Orleans,  Duke  of  (Regent),  180 

Orleans,  Duke  of  (King  Louis- 
Philippe),  101,  102,  113,  125 

Orleans,  Duke  of  (son  of  Louis- 
Philippe).  104,  106,  113,  193 

Orleans  family,  203,  297 

Ossian,  83,  84 

Owen.  R..  198 

Ozanam,  257,  269 

Panama,  166.  272 

Pope,  Du,  262 

Paris.  Count  of,   104,   161 

PARIS:   HAUSSMANNIZATION  of,   138 

PARIS  SHIP  CANAL,  168 

Parny,  83 

Pascal,  38,  231 

Passy,  Fred,  178 

Pasteur,  146,  238 

Pecaut.  242,  282 

P£guy,  Ch.,  287 


INDEX 


309 


Peladan,  Sar  J.f  181 

Pelletan,  C.,  132,  173 

Percier,  82 

Perdiguier,  A.,  192 

Pereires,  138,  139,  196 

Pfirier,  Casimir,  103,  108 

Pfirier,  Casimir-,  President,  164 

Perraud,   278,  279 

Perreyve,  278 

Persigny,  130,  131 

Peyronnet,  97 

Phalanstery,  197 

Picard,  80 

Picquart,  General,  169,  170,  172 

Pigault-Lebrun,  80 

Pius  VI,  259 

Pius  VII,  259-62 

Pius  IX,   134,   268,   269,  270,   272 

Pius  X,  275 

Pixerfecourt,  80 

Plato,  119,  231,  286 

Plotinus,   286 

Poincare,  H.,  33 

Poincarg,  R.,  210 

P airier,  M.,  114 

POITOU,  depression  of,  22-3 

Polignac,  100 

POMPADOUR  CULTURE,  78,  79,  112 

Ponsard,  119 

Pontmartin,  137 

Portal  is,  66 

Pradier,   118 

PRE-RAPHAELITISM,  181 

PRESS — 

under  Napoleon  I,  71 

under    the     Constitutional     Mon- 
archy, 109 

under  Napoleon  III,  137 
Pressense,  208 
Prevost-Paradol,  133 
Prince  Imperial,  147 
Proclus,   231 
Proudhon,  P.   J.,   132,   199-200,   204, 

206,   210,   214 
PROVENCE,  22,  27,  29,  82 
PSYCHOLOGY  of  the  French,  35-41 
PUBLIC  WORKS — 

Napoleon  I,  76-77 

Louis-Philippe,   115 

Napoleon  III,  138 

3rd  Republic,  168 
Puvis  de  Chavannes,  249 


QuatremSre  de  Quincy,  231 
Quinet,  118,  132,  133,  141,  151,  233, 
234,  237,  266 


Rabelais,     38 

RACK,  different  conceptions,  26 
RACES  IN  FRANCE,  32-5 
Rachel,  119 
Racial  decay?  41 
Racine,   41,    119,   251 
RADICAL  PARTY,  165,  173,  209-10,  216 
Raffet,  69 
RALLIES,  165,  273 
Rampolla,  275 
Raspail,   126,   128 
Rastignac,   111 
Ravignan,  266 
Raynouard,  82,  83 
REALISM,  145 
Recamier,  Mme.,  113 
Rggnault,   H.,    145 
Reinach,  S.  and  T.,  284 
Rgmusat,  A.,   231 
Rdmusat,  Mme.  de,  64 
Renan,  17,  36,  38,  118,  131,  132,  133, 
137,     145,    146,    159,    179,    180, 
183,   262 

REPUBLICAN  BLOCK,  172-3 
"RESISTANCES,"  193 
RESTORATION,  1st,  91 
RESTORATION,    2nd,    94     (cf.    Louis 

XVIII   and  Charles  X) 
Reuss,   282 
REVIVAL,  281-2 
Revue  de  Strasbourg,  282 
Ribot,   145 
Ribot,  A.,   246 
Richelieu,  Cardinal,  45 
Richelieu,  Duke,  95,  96 
Riesener,  78 
Rigny,   de,   103 
Ripley,  W.  Z.,  33 
Rivarol,   43 
Rivet,  207 
Roberty.  283 
Robespierre,   49 
Robin,  238 

Rochefort,   H.,   137,  166,   205 
Rodin.  118 
Roederer,  69 
Roger-Ducos,  56 
ROMAN  CONQUEST,  29 
ROMAN  QUESTION,  134-6,  182 
ROMANTICISM — 

Dawn,  82-4 

Hey-dey,  115-18 

Decline,  119,  144 
Romme,  49 
Roon,  154 
Rosalie,  Sister,  257 
Rossi,  134,  266 


310 


INDEX 


Rothschild,  284 

Rougon-Macquart,  136 

Rouland,  237 

Rousseau,  J.-J.,  38,  46,  78,  83,  116, 

116,  120,  183,  187,  197,  251,  262, 

286 

Rousseau,  Th.,  145 
Royer-Collard,  84,  108,  119,  229 
Rude,  118 
Ruskln,  21 
RUSSIAN  ALLIANCE,  167-8 

Sabatier,  P.,   283 

SABOTAGE,  213 

Saci,  S.  de,  231 

Sagnac,  Ph.,  46 

Saint-Arnaud,  130,  131 

Sainte-Aulaire,  Duchess  of,  113 

Sainte-Beuve,     132,     137,    145,    146, 

231,  239 

Saint-Germain  (edict  of),  46 
Saint-Lambert,  78 
Saint-Leon,  Martin,  192 
Saint-Pierre,  B.  de,  83 
Saint-Simon,  Duke  of,  44 
Saint-Simon,    H.,    SAINT-SIMONIAN- 
ISM,  111,  116,  118,  119,  137,  139, 
194-6,  204,  207,  267,  285 
Saint-Victor,  81 
SALONS,  political,  113 
Salvandy,  233 
Sand,    G..    117,    118,    132,    145,    192, 

194,  268 

Sangnier,  M.,   182,   280 
SANHEDRIM,  283 
Sardou,   74,   80,   136 
Sche>er,  132,  137,  282 
Scheurer-Kestner,  170 
Schiller.  83,  116 
Schneider,  190 
Scholl,  A.,  138 
SCIENCE — 

under  Napoleon  I,  79-80 
under    the     Constitutional     Mon- 
archy, 231 

under  Napoleon  III,  145,  146 
"  bankrupt,"  181 
Scribe,  80,  119 
SECRET  SOCIETIES,  107,  193-4 
SEDAN,  154-5 
Senancour,  83 
"  SENSUALISTS,"  81 
SEPARATION    (disestablishment),   49, 

267,  275-8 

Sergeants  of  La  Rochelle,  107 
Serre,  de,  108 
Sertillanges,  279 


Shakespeare,  41,  83 

Shelley,  116 

SieySs,  31,  61,  56,  71 

Simon,  J.,   133,   163,   237,  272,  286 

Sismondi,  83 

Socrates,  286 

SORBONNE,  248-9 

Sorel,  A.,  44 

Sorel,  G.,  182,  214 

Soufflot,  80 

Soult,  61,  193 

Spencer,  181,  286 

Spuller,  169,  273 

Sta61,  Mme.  de,  71,  83,  113 

Stevenson,  R.  L.,  21 

Stoffel,  154 

Strabo,  23 

Sue,  E.,  119,  202,  266 

SUEZ  CANAL,  138,  196 

Swetchine,  Mme..  270 

SYLLABUS,  270,  272 

Taine,  17,  36,  39,  43,  48,  50,  131, 
132,  133,  138,  139,  144,  145, 
146,  169,  179,  183,  240 

Talleyrand,  51,  75,  91,  111 

Talma,   57 

Taxil,  Leo,  274 

TEUTONIC  INVASIONS,  29 

Th£nard,  79,  231 

THEOPHILANTHROPY,  258 

Theresa,  140 

Thierry,  A..  31.  83,  118,  195 

Thiere,  57,  101,  103,  106.  108,  109. 
127,  128,  132.  136,  157.  168,  159, 
160-1,  163,  235,  236,  244,  298 

Thomas  Aquinas,  279 

Thouret,  127 

Thureau-Dangin,  ill 

Tocqueville,  de,  44 

Tolain,  205 

Tolstoy,  181 

Toulouse,  Dr.,  33  n 

Toussenel,  284 

Treilhard.  66 

Trochu,   154,  156 

Tronchet,  66 

TROUBADOUR  style,  82 

Troyon,  145 

Turenne,  75 

Turgot,  186 

UNIVERSITIES,  provincial,  249,  260 
UNIVERSITY,  227-32 

of  Paris,  248-9 
UTOPIAS,  social,  194-200 


INDEX 


311 


Vacherot,  133,  237 

Vaillant,   159 

Vatimesnil,   234,   245 

Vaughan.  Miss,  274  n 

Vauquelin,   79 

Vernet,  H.,  119 

Veuillot,  L.,  137,  140,  143,  145,  234, 

266,  269,  270 
Vianney,  J.  B.,  257 
Victor-Emmanuel  II,  135,  270 
Victor-Emmanuel  III,  275 
Victoria,  Queen,  140 
Viebig,  Clara,  151  n 
Vien,   80 
Vigny,  108,   117,  119,  131.  132,   145, 

262,   268 

Villele,  96,  97,  99,  100,  230 
Villemain,  108,  231,  233,  234,  237,  266 
Vtlliers  de  I'lsle-Adam,  181 
Viollet-le-Duc,   115 
Visconti,   145 
VISIGOTHS,  29 
Viviani,   209 
Vogiie,  de,  181 
Volney,  81 
Volta,  80 


Voltaire,  36,  38.  40,  46,  82,  114,  182, 
183,   246,   263,    286 

Wacht  am  Rhein,  151  n 
Wagner,  R.,  181 
Waldeck-Rousseau,    172,    208,    211, 

240,   241,   273 
Wallon,  162 
WALLOON  dialect,  27 
Walpole,  104 
Wandering  Jew,  266 
Washington,  51,  56,  62,  101,  194 
WATERLOO,  93 
Watteau,  78,  80 
Wellington,  95 
Wells,  H.  G.,  177 
WESLKTANS,  282 
WHITE  TERROR,  94,  263,  297 
William  the  Conqueror,  30 
Wimpfen,  General  de,  154 
Winterhalter,  138 
Words  of  a  Believer,  267 

Young,  83 
Yvon,  138 

Zola,    B.,    40,    136,    146,    171-2,    179, 
183,  198,  208 


A     000024197     6 


